logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.03.31 2014나54809
대여금등
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The Defendant asserted that he purchased K3 automobiles in the name of C in de facto marital relationship (hereinafter “instant automobiles”) in KRW 20,500,000 of the principal of the vehicle.

On February 2013, the defendant sold the plaintiff's mother-learning motor vehicle to the plaintiff and paid the price to the defendant, the plaintiff would allow the plaintiff to use the motor vehicle of this case and pay the installment price to the defendant.

Therefore, the Plaintiff disposed of KRW 7,00,000, and deposited KRW 7,000,000 in the account in the name of C used by the Plaintiff on February 18, 2013, the Defendant did not pay the installment payment of the instant vehicle properly, and eventually, paid KRW 18,601,049.

Therefore, the Plaintiff suffered a loss equivalent to KRW 7,00,000, which was paid to the Defendant due to the Defendant’s deception, or the Defendant received KRW 7,000,000 from the Plaintiff and did not repay its obligation, thereby obtaining the benefit of KRW 7,00,000 without any legal grounds. Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 7,00,000 and the delay damages therefrom.

2. The evidence Nos. 3-1, 2, and 6-1, 2-1, 7-2, and 7-1, and 7-2 of the evidence of evidence Nos. 3-2, and testimony by witness C of the first instance trial alone is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that, if the Defendant sold the Plaintiff’s mother-learning motor vehicle and paid the price to the Defendant, the Defendant agreed to allow the Plaintiff to use the instant motor vehicle and pay the price to the Defendant, or that the Plaintiff paid KRW 7,00,000 to the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow