logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.03.08 2017가단28615
사용료 등
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 13,153,90 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from October 27, 2017 to January 18, 2019.

Reasons

1. From April 29, 2016 to March 29, 2018, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff leased D buses owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant buses”) to the Defendant on the condition that the Plaintiff would be paid rent of KRW 2,216,00 per month. The Defendant paid a total of 24 minutes only 15 minutes, paid a remainder of KRW 19,94,00,000, and unpaid the rental fee of KRW 3,561,540.

In addition, on December 14, 2016, the Defendant promised to pay 13,153,900 won to the Plaintiff for the transfer registration of two vehicles.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid rent of KRW 19,45,141, the rent of KRW 3,561,540, the total sum of the agreed amount for the registration of vehicle relocation, and the delay damages.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant paid approximately KRW 2,216,00 per month an installment payment concerning the instant vehicle from May 10, 2016 to June 5, 2017, respectively. The Defendant received the instant vehicle from the Plaintiff and operated the instant vehicle from April 2, 2016 to July 2, 2017. The fact that the Defendant directly assumed the insurance premium, repair cost, etc. concerning the instant vehicle during the said operation period does not conflict between the parties or clearly dispute the Defendant.

However, there is no legal document regarding the instant vehicle between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the Plaintiff received KRW 5,00,000 from the Defendant on April 12, 2016, which was before the payment of the first installment on May 10, 2016, as the delivery charge for the instant vehicle, and the Defendant contests the fact of lease by purchasing the instant vehicle as the condition for the payment of remaining installments (24 installments), and the Defendant returned the instant vehicle to the Plaintiff around July 2017. In light of the fact that the Defendant paid the installment on the instant vehicle owned by the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff, the mere fact that the Plaintiff paid the Plaintiff the installment on the instant vehicle to the Plaintiff is a condition for the payment of the installment.

arrow