logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.04.05 2016가단356352
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 49,409,050 and KRW 39,000 among them, from December 11, 2015 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 10, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased KRW 46,700,00 from the Defendant operating a used motor vehicle transaction business with the trade name called “C” for used cars E63AMG car (the first registration date, September 10, 2009; the registration number: D: hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”).

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). B.

On December 30, 2015, the instant automobile occurred in the meter board while driving the engine, such as engine warnings, cooling water supplementary warnings, etc., and engine string warnings, etc., and even after the operation, there was a phenomenon that the engine is unstable (so-called a bad tide), the Plaintiff entered and inspected the instant automobile at the Center A/S center, and as a result of the inspection, there was a defect in the engine's damage, etc. inside the engine, which led to an estimate of 12,344,420 won out of its repair cost.

C. The instant motor vehicle has the ability of the transferor to perform the so-called “signaling” work to improve the output of engine, which caused the deterioration and damage of the durability of the cranch showe, and the present cost of repairing the motor vehicle is required in KRW 11,603,328.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3, 5-1, Eul evidence 2, the result of the request for vehicle appraisal to automobile professional engineers E and the fact inquiry reply, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. In full view of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to deem that the instant motor vehicle existed to the extent that the purpose of the contract could not be achieved from the time the instant sales contract was concluded, and that the duplicate of the complaint stating the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to rescind was served on the Defendant, and thus, the instant sales contract was concluded upon the delivery of the duplicate of the complaint to the Defendant.

arrow