logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.07.09 2019가단545528
매매대금반환
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant C shall be 54,072,600 won and 12% per annum from September 3, 2019 to the date of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is a company that sells a motor vehicle indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) to the Plaintiff as a company whose business purpose is automobile wholesale and retail business, automobile sales brokerage business, etc., and the Defendant C is an employee of the Defendant Company in charge of selling the instant vehicle.

B. Around May 22, 2019, the Defendant Company entered into a sales contract with the Plaintiff, via Nonparty D, which was a motor vehicle dealer, with the content that the Defendant Company sold the instant motor vehicle to the Plaintiff as of May 28, 2019, with the purchase price of KRW 44 million and delivery date.

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). C.

According to the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff paid the sales price of KRW 44 million to the Defendant Company, and received the instant vehicle. On May 28, 2019, the Plaintiff completed the ownership transfer registration of the instant vehicle in the name of the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff paid the relocation cost of KRW 2,299,60 in total with the registration tax on the instant vehicle (=2,000,000 public bonds of KRW 24,600 as agent fee of KRW 275,00).

At the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, Defendant C explained that the instant vehicle was fixed onto D, the width of which was 2,170 cm, and the sale was delayed due to the failure to carry eight parts at once, and asked D whether there is any other problem on the vehicle.

In addition, the Defendant Company issued to the Plaintiff a used vehicle performance inspection register issued by Nonparty E on March 20, 2019, and indicated that the above register is “no” in the accident history and repair history, and there was no indication on the parts above the part above the part above the part above, such as exchange.

E. However, the instant vehicle did not use a tower installed at the time of release due to the accident and was replaced with a new tower, and Defendant C entered into the instant sales contract.

arrow