logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원마산지원 2015.12.10 2015가단3702
매매대금
Text

1. The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 21,484,526 as well as KRW 19,481,129 as to the Plaintiff from October 6, 2015.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendants are married couple.

B. Around December 31, 2012, Defendant C sold D digging machines registered as one’s own ownership (hereinafter “instant digging machines”) to E.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is the owner of the instant excavation machines. The Plaintiff delegated the Defendants to sell and purchase the instant excavation machines, which had been registered in the name of Defendant C, and the Defendants agreed to pay KRW 64,00,000 to the Plaintiff upon the sale of the instant excavation machines.

The Defendants agreed to lend KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff on September 19, 2012, which had delayed the sale and purchase of the instant excavation machines, to deduct the amount from the purchase price to be paid thereafter. On November 27, 2012, the Defendants agreed to pay KRW 680,000 on a monthly basis to the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 34,000,000 as the rent until the instant excavation period is sold and sold, and to pay KRW 34,00,000 as soon as the instant excavation period is traded.

Although the Defendants sold the instant searcher, they did not pay the remainder of KRW 34,000,000 to the Plaintiff, and did not pay KRW 680,000 per month agreed from September 27, 2013.

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder after deducting the part transferred by the Plaintiff to F from the amount calculated by the rate of 24% per annum from September 27, 2013 to the date of full payment.

3. Determination

A. In light of the following facts, the Plaintiff did not have dispute as to whether the Plaintiff was the owner of the instant excavation machines, the entries in Gap 1 through 10, 16 through 20 (including paper numbers), and the overall purport of the pleadings, the owner of the instant excavation machines is deemed to have been the Plaintiff.

(1) On March 201, the Plaintiff requested F to purchase the excavation season, and the money borrowed from the mother and wife system and the insurance money.

arrow