logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2021.01.20 2019가단5182887
부당이득금
Text

The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur who runs a business such as rash processing with the trade name of “E”, and F is a person who has used the name of Defendant B while engaging in the business of mediating rashing machine with the trade name of “G,” and Defendant C (hereinafter “Defendant C”) is a company that runs the business of leasing facilities and the business of carrying on side financing, etc.

B. 1) On April 15, 2016, the Plaintiff, including the conclusion of a contract, purchased a heavy rashing machine (hereinafter “instant machinery”) with F on or around April 15, 2016, at KRW 90 million, and the payment period of the instant machinery shall be May 30, 2016; KRW 27 million shall be paid as of May 22, 2016; KRW 27 million shall be paid as of April 22, 2016; and the remainder amount shall be KRW 63 million (hereinafter “the instant purchase contract”); and the Plaintiff paid KRW 27 million to F on or around April 22, 2016.

2) On May 31, 2016, the Plaintiff, including the conclusion of a lease agreement, entered into a lease agreement with Defendant C as a commercial supplier under the name of Defendant C (H), with the cost of acquiring the instant machinery at KRW 90 million, KRW 48 months, monthly lease fee of KRW 1 to KRW 412,500, KRW 4 through KRW 48, KRW 1,676,279 (hereinafter “the lease agreement of this case”). Article 4(4) of the lease agreement of this case provides that even if there are defects in goods, the condition of the operation of the goods, defects in the use of the goods, damage, destruction, or destruction of the goods, or the suspension of the use or possession of the goods, the Plaintiff may not refuse to pay the lease fees and other obligations under this contract, and the Plaintiff may not, without delay, issue a certificate of delivery to the Plaintiff under Article 5 (3).

arrow