logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2016.09.22 2016가단7418
자동차인도
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 16, 2016, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of a motor vehicle recorded in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”) as its owner upon request by the head of friendship C, which is engaged in the motor vehicle transaction business.

B. C signed a sales contract with the Defendant on April 28, 2016 with respect to the instant motor vehicle, and delivered the instant motor vehicle to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to deliver the automobile of this case to the plaintiff who is the owner of the automobile of this case, unless it proves and proves that he has the possessory right to the automobile of this case

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant's assertion that the plaintiff entrusted C with the right to sell the motor vehicle of this case.

B. Determination 1 A) The Plaintiff had a loan claim against friendly job offering C. However, upon around February 2016, C proposed that the Plaintiff would sell the instant vehicle and pay the money that the Plaintiff lent to friendly job offering C, and that the Plaintiff consented thereto.

B) On February 16, 2016, C registered the transfer of ownership in the name of the Plaintiff on the instant automobile. On February 22, 2016, C obtained a loan from the KFF Capital Co., Ltd. as collateral, and established a mortgage on the instant automobile with respect to the mortgage amounting to KRW 9.5 million, the Plaintiff received KRW 2 million out of the above loan from C, and C issued a certificate of personal seal for the sale of the instant automobile to C, and C sold the instant automobile to the Defendant according to the above delegation by the Plaintiff. 2) According to the above fact of recognition, the Plaintiff delegated the sale of the instant automobile to C, and the Defendant delegated its delegation.

arrow