logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 통영지원 2018.11.27 2018가단25617
계약해지 및 점유권 처분권 확인의 소
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 11, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into an automobile financial lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to automobiles listed in the separate sheet owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant automobile”), setting the automobile price of 40,643,000 won, advance payment amount of 13,024,938 won, monthly rent of 334,040 won, monthly rent of 36 months, and lease period of 36 months.

B. Article 20(2) of the automobile lease agreement applicable to the instant lease agreement provides, “Where a customer delays monthly rent on more than two consecutive occasions, the financial company may terminate the contract after notifying the customer of the fact of delay of performance of obligation and the termination of this agreement by no later than three business days prior to the date of termination of the contract and claim the return of the motor vehicle. Where the customer is not notified by no later than three business days prior to the date of termination of the contract, the date three business days after the date the actual notification arrives shall be the date of termination of the contract

C. In accordance with the instant lease agreement, the Defendant’s delayed payment of the lease fee on at least two consecutive occasions during the operation of the instant car, and the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant lease agreement on November 27, 2015, and received the delivery of the instant automobile from the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 2 to 6, purport of whole pleadings

2. We examine ex officio the legality of the instant lawsuit on the determination of the legality of the instant lawsuit.

In a lawsuit for confirmation, there must be a benefit of confirmation as a requirement for protection of rights, and the benefit of confirmation must be immediately removed because of unstable rights or legal status, danger, and it is recognized only as the most effective means to eliminate such apprehension and risk. Thus, the removal of such apprehension, risk is dancing or insignificant due to the existence of other special circumstances.

arrow