(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.09.27 2017나53807

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.09.27 2017나53807

용역비

Text

1. The appeal filed by the Counterclaim Plaintiff is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Counterclaim Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is as follows, except for the addition of the following '2. Additional Judgment' as to the assertion that the Counterclaim Lessee emphasizes in this court, and thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. On October 10, 2015, the counterclaim Defendant notified the counterclaim Defendant, the owner of the completion of the maintenance on October 15, 2015, but the counterclaim Defendant acquired the instant vehicle. As such, the counterclaim Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 4,664,500 to the counterclaim, calculated by applying KRW 9,500,00,000, which is a parking fee for public parking lots in the relevant region, pursuant to Article 137(1)4 of the Enforcement Rule of the Automobile Management Act. (2) In the course of filing the instant lawsuit by the counterclaim Defendant, the counterclaim Defendant damaged the Nonparty’s reputation in the main complaint and the preparatory document of the instant case, and threatened the Nonparty to make public the details of the maintenance and the place of business open to the Internet.

Therefore, the counterclaim defendant is obliged to pay 5,000,000 won to the counterclaim.

B. In light of the determination on the claim for the charges for the storage of motor vehicles, Article 137(1)4 of the Enforcement Rule of the Automobile Management Act provides that where an owner of an automobile moves the motor vehicle to another place without repairing it for 72 consecutive hours or notifies the owner of an automobile of the completion of the maintenance to the maintenance business site for 72 hours or more from the date of notification of the completion of the maintenance to the owner of an automobile, the owner of an automobile may claim the “actual expenses incurred in the storage and management of the relevant motor vehicle” from the date 72 hours have elapsed since the date of storage or notification of the completion of the maintenance to the owner of an automobile.

The Lessee asserted that the first instance court paid KRW 1,976,00 as the storage fee of the instant vehicle.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

-자동차관리법 시행규칙 제137조 제1항 제4호

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2021.04.29 2020가합4992

-광주지방법원 2016.02.18 2015가단51338

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.03.31 2014가단63634

-부산지방법원 2017.06.27 2016가단28237

-서울남부지방법원 2020.01.14 2018가단23500