(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.10.12 2017가단143882

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) 서울북부지방법원 2018.10.12 2017가단143882

차량반환 등 청구의 소

Text

1. The defendant

(a) deliver a motor vehicle listed in Attachment 1;

B. From January 3, 2018, as above.

Reasons

1. Facts of premise;

A. On October 25, 2016, the owner (user company) who was the date of the succession contract for the vehicle subject to the division of the siren agreement and the succession agreement entered into a siren agreement with the following rental agreement as to the vehicles on September 25, 2016, which were the siren No. 1,203,290 won per annum 25% per annum 33% per annum 25% per annum in the 25% per annum in the 2ndle 2ndle 33 months in the 2016.09.30% per annum 1,290,520 per annum 24% per annum in the 24% per annum in the interest of the defendant, etc. from September 1, 2016 to the defendant's business who was employed by the defendant, etc. for the business of the defendant, etc.

D. The Defendant set aside on December 31, 2016, and the Plaintiff did not need to possess the first and second motor vehicles. The Defendant used the first and second motor vehicles, and the Defendant subsequently agreed that the Defendant would succeed to the name of the first and second sirens contract (hereinafter referred to as “the succession agreement”).

1. The Plaintiff permits the Defendant to use the siren Nos. 1 and 2 that were concealed in the name of the Plaintiff until March 31, 2017.

2. The Defendant paid a siren by March 31, 2017, and the Plaintiff does not infringe on the Defendant’s right to use the vehicle.

3. On or after March 31, 2017, the Defendant is entitled to transfer the name of the vehicle from the Plaintiff.

4. Where the rental fee of a vehicle is overdue before March 31, 2017, the plaintiff shall handle the return at will;

B. (i) The Defendant did not succeed to the lele of the 1 and 2 vehicles until March 31, 2017, and the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content that “The Plaintiff is urged by the owner to pay rental fees due to the unpaid rental fees, and until October 15, 2017.”

Luxembourg The defendant is not allowed to pay the plaintiff voluntarily due to the plaintiff's "the plaintiff's Gap's Gap's Gap's Gap's Gap's Gap's Gap's Gap's Gap's Gap's Gap's Gap's Gap's Gap's Gap's plaintiff's main cause of the dispute resolution,

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2021.03.19 2020고단7869

-대전지방법원 2019.07.11 2018가단26588

-전주지방법원 2018.05.30 2018고정39

-울산지방법원 2020.11.12 2019나10569

-대구지방법원김천지원 2016.10.13 2016가단33338