(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.01.30 2018나307691

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 2019.01.30 2018나307691

운송료

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who runs Kwikset Service, etc. with the trade name of “C”.

B. The defendant is the wife of D.

On November 4, 2015, the Defendant registered the type of business as transportation business under its name as “E”.

C. Around the time of the Defendant’s registration of business as above, D entered into a package landing contract with F Points G and D to place vehicles into the F Points and to carry out cargo transport services (hereinafter “instant package landing contract”), and drafted a written contract therefor.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 (including provisional number), Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The parties’ assertion 1) The Defendant would operate the F Point in the partnership with the Plaintiff G, and accordingly registered the business with the name of “E” in the name of “E”, and caused D to purchase the 14 tons truck and transport the cargo to the collection of the cargo. After that, the Defendant and D were excluded from G from June 2016 and operated the F Point independently. The Plaintiff was entrusted with transportation from F Point until August 25, 2016 and transported the cargo from F Point, but the Defendant did not pay the transportation charge of KRW 28,48,152. As such, the Defendant did not pay the transportation charge of the said amount, which was deducted from the Plaintiff’s direct payment of KRW 10,159,00,000, which was deducted from the Plaintiff’s payment of KRW 10,329,152, which was made by the Defendant, and the Defendant did not enter into the agreement with the Plaintiff as the name of “E” and the Defendant did not have any actual obligation to pay the remainder to the Plaintiff.

B. The fact that the Defendant registered the type of business as transportation business and registered the business in the name of “E” was earlier.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2018.10.30 2017가단60657

-광주지방법원 2016.11.08 2016가단2197

-서울고등법원 2015.12.17 2015나2006034

-의정부지방법원 2016.02.04 2015나12148

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.12.23 2014가단37081