beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On August 4, 2011, the Plaintiff lent KRW 250,000,00 to C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) and created a joint mortgage on May 29, 2012 with respect to five taxi units for business use (D, E, F, G, and H) owned by C in order to secure the loan claim.
B. On July 17, 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract for business license and transfer to acquire all of the passenger transport business licenses held by C (hereinafter “instant business license”) and three-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one-one (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the competent authority on October 15, 201 and received notification of acceptance on October 18 of the same year.
C. Upon receipt of the above repair notification, in the column for special agreement on the certificate of automobile transfer (for direct transaction by the transferor) submitted by the defendant to the competent authority when filing an application for the registration of transfer following the acquisition of a motor vehicle, the defendant succeeds to the responsibility of the case of seizure and provisional seizure other than the collateral security established on the public record of the motor vehicle, only by the date of the contract, and only by the date of the contract. The defendant will assume the responsibility for the case exceeding the transfer amount (hereinafter “the special agreement of this case”), and the defendant’s corporate seal impression is affixed next thereto.
In relation to the instant case, in the case where the Newcomer Co., Ltd. that acquired C’s claim against the Defendant claimed that C’s obligation would be assumed by the Defendant and sought the payment of the acquisition amount (Seoul East Eastern District Court 2014Gahap5300), the judgment dismissing the claim of the Newcomer on May 19, 2015 was rendered, and the appeal was filed by the Newcomer Co., Ltd.
(Seoul High Court 2015Na16394). [Reasons for Recognition] A, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4 through 7 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence No. 1-2.