beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The court's explanation concerning this case is based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.
1) Except as mentioned below, the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the court of first instance, and it is difficult to reverse the conclusion of the judgment of the court of first instance based on each of the entries in the evidence No. 6-1 through No. 3 submitted by the defendant in the court of first instance. 2. The defendant shall transfer the ownership of the machinery of this case to the defendant in accordance with Article 5 of the Re-Purchase Agreement in order for the plaintiff to claim for the re-purchase price. The plaintiff shall submit a defense of simultaneous performance to the purport that the plaintiff cannot pay the re-purchase price before the transfer of ownership of the machinery of this case by the plaintiff. The plaintiff shall pay the re-purchase price under Article 4 and shall transfer the ownership of the machinery of this case to the defendant as well as the fact that Article 5 (1) of the Re-Purchase Agreement of this case provides that the plaintiff shall transfer the ownership of the machinery of this case to the lessee. However, the so-called financial lease is recognized earlier.
A) A transaction in which a lessee purchases from a lessee and lends it to a lessee and collects the acquisition fund of, interest on, and other expenses for the leased goods from the lessee during the lease period. The essential function of the transaction is to provide the lessee with financial convenience for the acquisition fund of the leased goods. As a lessee, it is necessary for the lessee to take measures to ensure the recovery of the acquisition fund of the leased goods (the original loan) and compensation for other losses under the lease contract (see Supreme Court Decision 91Da25598, Jul. 14, 1992). As recognized earlier, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, if the instant rental contract is terminated under Article 4 of the re-purchase agreement, the Defendant claims for the re-purchase of the Plaintiff.