(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.11.22 2018나323 | 리걸엔진

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) 창원지방법원 2018.11.22 2018나323

대위변제금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 26, 2012, the Plaintiff’s spouse: (a) purchased D (former Automobile Number: E); (b) entered into an installment financing agreement with F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”); and (b) borrowed KRW 16,00,000; and (c) the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation to F under the said installment financing agreement.

B. On April 19, 2013, the name of the owner of the instant vehicle was changed from C to G, and the Defendant purchased the instant vehicle and transferred it under his own name on June 9, 2014.

C. F filed a lawsuit against Changwon District Court Decision 2015Gau1285 (Seoul High Court Decision 2015Gau1285) against C and the Plaintiff for performance of the loan obligations under the said installment financing agreement. On January 28, 2015, the said court rendered a decision on performance recommendation with the effect that “C and the Plaintiff shall pay F the principal and interest of the loan amounting to KRW 7,397,187, and any delay damages for the principal amounting to KRW 6,764,680 among them,” and the said decision on performance recommendation was finalized as it is.

[Ground of recognition] The non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the result of the order to submit financial transaction information to F by the court of first instance, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion of the parties and their determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant purchased the instant vehicle from C, who is the actual owner of the instant vehicle, and agreed between the Plaintiff and C to accept the entire loan obligation that C ought to pay in installments with C, but the Plaintiff failed to perform this, and thus, the Plaintiff was responsible for compensating the Plaintiff for damages incurred therefrom. (2) The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant purchased the instant vehicle from G, and agreed to partially repay the said loan obligation within the scope of KRW 11,00,000,000, when purchasing the instant vehicle from G, the Defendant agreed to compensate the Plaintiff for damages incurred therefrom.

B. 1 Determinations. 1) Written Evidence Nos. 5, 6, and 9 (Gaz number.)

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.09 2017가합564821

-수원지방법원 2015.09.17 2014고단5755

-서울북부지방법원 2018.05.31 2017가단26598

-서울서부지방법원 2016.05.31 2016가단204953

-서울북부지방법원 2018.08.21 2018가단101359