logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.04.27 2017나6522
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 26, 2017, the registration number of the vehicle transferred between the Defendant and the Plaintiff to C was changed to E.

The 6X2Track vehicles (hereinafter “instant vehicles”) entered into a contract to purchase KRW 18.5 million in the purchase price (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. On the date of the instant contract, the Plaintiff paid KRW 5 million to the Defendant as the down payment and accepted the instant vehicle, and paid KRW 13.5 million to the remainder on May 4, 2017.

C. From April 26, 2017, the Plaintiff operated the instant vehicle and caused the engine error to flow into the cooling water, etc. on June 1, 2017. On June 7, 2017, the Plaintiff paid the instant vehicle repair cost of KRW 9,880,000 in total upon completion of the repair of the instant vehicle.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) while the Defendant knew of the breakdown that the engine error with respect to the instant vehicle flows into the cooling water at the time of the instant contract, the Defendant did not notify the Plaintiff thereof, and sold the instant vehicle as if there were no problems.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to compensate for damages equivalent to the above repair cost paid by the plaintiff.

B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the purport of the entire arguments as to the aforementioned evidence, namely, the instant vehicle appears to have been considerably deteriorated due to the vehicle 17 years elapsed since the time of the instant contract, and accordingly, it appears to have determined the purchase price at a relatively low price. Article 4 of the instant contract also provides for the buyer’s failure or defectiveness after taking over the vehicle.

arrow