(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.05.03 2016나52521

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) 부산지방법원 2018.05.03 2016나52521

손해배상(기)

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On March 17, 2014, the Plaintiff’s assertion entered into a contract with the Defendant to purchase the instant vehicle at KRW 8 million, which was accepted by the Defendant, on the repair of the D-Wing Vehicle that was destroyed by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).

However, since the defendant has refused to accept the present vehicle and has not paid the price, he shall be liable for damages due to nonperformance.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 3.6 million for the storage expenses of the instant vehicle from May 17, 2014 to January 16, 2015 (i.e., KRW 15,000 per day x 2.40 days), ② the remainder of KRW 2.7 million after deducting KRW 5.3 million for the repair expenses paid by C out of KRW 8 million agreed upon to be paid by the Defendant, ③ the amount of taxes imposed on the instant vehicle during the Defendant’s neglect period, and ③ the amount of taxes imposed on the instant vehicle was paid by C during the period of the Defendant’s neglect, in consideration of the fact that C paid the repair expenses, partially reduced the amount of damages incurred to the Plaintiff (i.e., KRW 6., KRW 3.6 million (= KRW 2.7 million).

B. First of all, as to whether the Plaintiff had entered into a contract with the Defendant to purchase the said vehicle in KRW 8 million with respect to the repair of the instant vehicle between the Defendant and the Defendant, each entry in the evidence Nos. 6 through 8, and 21, which seems consistent with this, is not believed, but is insufficient to recognize it by itself, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim based on the premise that the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a contract as alleged by the plaintiff is without merit.

2. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, and the defendant's appeal is accepted and the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked and the plaintiff's claim is

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.02 2016나30288

-대구지방법원 2019.01.17 2018나309512

-수원지방법원오산시법원 2020.01.09 2019가단191

-인천지방법원 2019.12.06 2019고정1437