(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2019.01.31 2017가단7417

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) 부산지방법원동부지원 2019.01.31 2017가단7417

매매대금 등

Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant’s husband E (hereinafter “Defendant”) from around 2014 to the Busan Gangseo-gu F operated G and Hart.

In June 2015, the business was closed around 2015.

B. On August 17, 2015, the Defendant remitted KRW 100 million to Nonparty I’s account designated by the Plaintiff, and paid KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff on September 22, 2015, in total, KRW 200 million to the Plaintiff.

C. The Plaintiff, under Nonparty I’s name, newly built the Class I neighborhood living facilities (retail stores) of the first 494.17 square meters of the light steel structure, the single-stop panel, and began to operate the business from January 20, 2016 to “Dmat (hereinafter “instant marina”).”

The Defendant offered Hart’s facilities to the instant marina, and worked from 11:0 am to am closed by holding a director in the position of the head of the division at the instant marina, and deposited industrial products management and accounting affairs, daily preparation, cash income into the account in the name of I.m.

E. The Defendant gave up the Plaintiff around October 2016.

The plaintiff's proposal was accepted on October 20, 2016, which was demanded to return KRW 200,000,000 to the non-party J account designated by the plaintiff, and transferred KRW 65,00,000 to the same day.

F. On October 20, 2016, the Plaintiff, even after transferring the instant marina to the Defendant, managed the account in the name of Nonparty I in which the credit card settlement amount, etc. of the instant marina is deposited, and paid part of the money to the Defendant. On January 10, 2017, the Plaintiff changed the name of the business operator of the instant marina from I to the Defendant.

G. The Defendant transferred the name of the business operator and returned the old type of the vehicle under the name of Nonparty I, which was provided by the Plaintiff for commuting to and from work, to the Plaintiff, and changed the deposit account for the credit card payment.

[Ground of Recognition] Unsatisfy, Witness E, and K’s testimony (except for the portion rejected after the testimony of Witness K), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' arguments.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2016.12.16 2016고단4443

-대구지방법원 2016.07.05 2016가단10527

-인천지방법원 2017.11.30 2016고단9139

-의정부지방법원 2017.11.13 2017고단1799

-인천지방법원 2019.09.25 2019가단222439