(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.04.03 2017가단228600

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) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.04.03 2017가단228600

소유권이전등록

Text

1. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

Reasons

1. The following facts of basic facts may be acknowledged either in dispute between the parties or in combination with the whole purport of the pleadings as stated in Gap evidence 1 to 5 and 9 (including paper numbers):

On May 23, 2002, the deceased C (hereinafter referred to as the “the deceased”) completed the registration of ownership of the motor vehicle listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as the “instant motor vehicle”). The instant motor vehicle was operated by the Appointor D (hereinafter referred to as the “Appointed”) who is the second son of the deceased.

B. Around August 2002, the Appointor borrowed KRW 10,000,000 as security of the instant vehicle from the Defendant and delivered the said vehicle to the Defendant.

C. On April 25, 2008, April 25, 2009, April 25, 2009, and April 25, 2010, the Defendant subscribed to automobile insurance with each deceased as the insured, the defendant as the contractor, and on April 25, 2010. On April 25, 2011, the Defendant’s father and wife subscribed to the automobile insurance with the deceased as the contractor and as the insured.

After filing the instant lawsuit, the Deceased died on July 5, 2017, during which the lawsuit was pending, and the Plaintiff and the inheritor taken over the instant lawsuit.

E. The Selection did not pay the above loan up to now.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. At the time of borrowing the above money from the Defendant, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant that “if the appointed person fails to repay the borrowed money, the ownership of the instant vehicle shall be transferred to the Defendant in lieu of the repayment” (hereinafter “instant accord and satisfaction agreement”), and accordingly, the instant vehicle shall be delivered to the Defendant.

In addition, on April 25, 2008, the defendant subscribed to the automobile insurance with himself as the contractor for the automobile of this case, which expresses his intention to receive payment in kind of the automobile of this case.

Therefore, the defendant's declaration of intention on April 25, 2008 in this case.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2014.06.12 2013가단26619

-부산지방법원 2014.11.14 2014나7251

-수원지방법원 2015.05.29 2014나34604

-인천지방법원 2018.12.12 2018가단219450

-광주지방법원 2019.05.15 2018나3546