(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.05.11 2014가단57812

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) 대구지방법원 2016.05.11 2014가단57812

대여금

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 November 30, 201, the Plaintiff entered into a facility lease agreement with B (hereinafter “instant agreement”) with the following terms and conditions.

According to the instant contract at 22,60,000 lease deposit of KRW 100,00,000 per annum 25% per annum of overdue interest rate of KRW 22,548,870 (one time or 36 times) with the lease model title HCA160, HNCP 160, and CI-11 volume three (one unit), the Plaintiff may terminate the contract where the lessee fails to perform his/her obligations under the contract (Article 20), and the Plaintiff may cancel the contract if the lessee fails to perform his/her obligations under the contract (Article 20), such as the claim and disposition of the goods at the time of termination of the contract, the claim for the performance of contractual obligations, including the amount of provision loss, and the claim for the performance of the surety obligations against the joint and several surety.

(Article 21). (b)

After that, on February 22, 2012, the lease user under the contract of this case was changed from B to C, and the joint guarantor was changed to the defendant and one other.

C. C is in arrears with the payment of the lease fee. As a result of the termination of the five lease agreements including the instant contract (the ratio of the lease amount to the instant contract is 35.319%), the Plaintiff was returned from C on May 10, 2013 the lease goods (press 3) and seven machinery (hereinafter “instant machinery”) other than the instant contract, and was delegated with the sales authority.

On May 27, 2013, the Plaintiff conducted a bid for the instant machinery. In the tendering procedure, the Plaintiff was selected as a purchaser by presenting the highest price of KRW 150,000,000,000, which was recommended to participate in the bid by C.

However, the Plaintiff received 15 million won as down payment from the large-scale industry, and demanded the large-scale industry to bear transportation and storage expenses of machinery, and the large-scale industry refused to do so, the sales price was eventually rescinded by agreement, and accordingly the down payment was returned.

E. The Plaintiff is as D around June 17, 2013.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.06 2017가합549341

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.22 2014가단82369

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.09 2014가합59717

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.27 2018가단5143175

-대법원 1995. 9. 29. 선고 93다3417 판결