(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.07.13 2015가합55622

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) 의정부지방법원 2016.07.13 2015가합55622

손해배상(기)

Text

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

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 7, 2010, the Plaintiff leased the gas station on the ground C (hereinafter “instant gas station”) and its site to the Defendant by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 20 million, from July 20, 2010 to July 19, 2013 (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) (hereinafter “instant lease contract”); and the Defendant sold petroleum sales business at the instant gas station until February 14, 2015.

B. On June 27, 2014, the Defendant’s father D (or his employee) sold 65.9 liters, including others, as the fuel for the trucking vehicle at the request of the driver of the trucking vehicle. In the process of detection, the Defendant’s father D (or his employee) was discovered that the products stored in the instant gas station were stored in the storage tank, among the petroleum products stored in the instant gas station, and that the products were found to have been stored in the storage tank.

C. On September 2014, the Pocheon City issued a disposition suspending business 45 days (from September 22, 2014 to November 5, 2014) on the ground that he/she violated Article 39 of the Petroleum and Petroleum Substitute Fuel Business Act (hereinafter “petroleum Business Act”) by selling light oil to the Defendant as fuel for cargo vehicles, and issued a warning on the fact that some of the petroleum products stored by the Defendant did not meet the quality standards.

On December 26, 2014, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a letter verifying that the instant lease contract was terminated on the grounds that the Plaintiff removed the third party director of the instant gas station and was unable to use the gas station for rent purposes.

E. After that, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with E on the instant gas station, and the Defendant delivered the instant gas station to the Plaintiff around February 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, 5, Eul evidence 1, 6, 12 through 15, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the defendant of this case's gas station.

참조조문

-석유 및 석유대체연료 사업법 제39조

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2018.02.08 2017고단5065

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2014.10.24 2014고단1171

-수원지방법원 2021.03.31 2019가단542055

-광주지방법원 2017.09.14 2017구합10265

-의정부지방법원 2017.05.18 2017고정534