beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Grounds for claim;
A. The plaintiff is the owner of the goods of this case. Since the plaintiff was the owner of the goods of this case, the plaintiff was stolen by the plaintiff, the defendant, who is the custodian of the goods of this case, is obligated to return
B. Since the Defendant disposed of the instant goods, it is obligated to pay KRW 23,222,70 to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the market price due to nonperformance of the obligation to deliver the instant goods.
2. Facts of recognition;
A. On September 12, 2014, the Plaintiff was called from the person claiming that he/she is the F director of the EF division (hereinafter “the person without the name”) of the Defendant Company E (hereinafter “the person without the name”), and purchased KRW 30 million from G (hereinafter “G”), a company holding the said goods, to purchase four metric tons of the 25 sn beam truck.
After that, on September 12, 2014, the Plaintiff sold the said goods to the person who was unaware of his/her name in KRW 69,202,980, but agreed on the transportation vehicle designated by the person who was unaware of his/her name at the Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City H (G place of business).
B. I purchased 300 won per kg by telephone from the person who was in the name of the same day, and told the Plaintiff at the G’s workplace that “the Plaintiff was sent by the person who was not the person who was the person who was the person who was the person who was the person who was the person who was the person who was the person who was the person who was the person who was the person
C. I: (a) loaded the article on the four truck truck he requested to carry; (b) checked the weight; and (c) remitted KRW 29,358,00 to the bank account designated by the winners of the name cards.
The defendant assistant intervenor sold the above goods again to the defendant. D.
I stated that “A truck will start because it was transferred” to the Plaintiff, and that “the Plaintiff should not start because it was known of the rent.”
I set up a call to a person who has lost his name, and then listened to the speech that "I will see" by telephone after locking, and the plaintiff "I will start the truck."
The plaintiff receives text messages from a person who has no name but paid KRW 69,202,980.