(영문) 수원지방법원안산지원 2019.11.29 2019가단53603

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) 수원지방법원안산지원 2019.11.29 2019가단53603

구상금

Text

1. The defendant shall start up with respect to KRW 123,826,313 and the damages for delay as indicated in the attached Form to the plaintiff on October 2019.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 5, 2014, C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with the Defendant on the condition that the Nonparty Company acquired the ownership of the instant machine from the Plaintiff and lent it to the Defendant, and the Defendant would pay rent to the Nonparty Company.

B. Meanwhile, the non-party company entered into a repurchase agreement with the Plaintiff that supplied the instant machinery to the Defendant on the same day (hereinafter “the instant repurchase agreement”). According to the agreement, “if the lease agreement between the non-party company and the Defendant is terminated, the Plaintiff shall pay the purchase price to the non-party company regardless of whether or not to recover the leased article upon the non-party company’s request for repurchase, and shall recover the article from the Defendant,” the non-party company agreed that “if the leased article was destroyed or lost due to a cause attributable to the Defendant’s intentional fault, etc., and no such article exists or is damaged, the Plaintiff’s obligation to repurchase the said machinery shall not be exempted or reduced.”

(Articles 3, 4). (c)

After taking over the instant machinery, the Defendant was convicted of having offered it to a third party as a security for transfer, and embezzled by selling it at will. D.

On March 22, 2017, Nonparty Company demanded the Plaintiff to pay the repurchase price under the instant repurchase agreement, along with the termination of the lease agreement.

E. Accordingly, from May 31, 2017 to October 4, 2019, the Plaintiff paid to Nonparty Company a total of KRW 123,826,313 as shown in the attached Form.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry in Gap evidence 1-5 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant re-purchase agreement of this case.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.10.10 2017가단88245

-부산지방법원 2017.11.14 2017가단323663

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.02.08 2017가단32303

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.11.17 2016가합1873

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.26 2014나30581