logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.05 2017가합37381
유체동산인도
Text

1. The defendant shall deliver to the plaintiff each movable property listed in the separate sheet.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is a company that mainly carries on facility leasing business or installment financing business, and the defendant is a person who carries on machinery parts manufacturing business.

B. On July 31, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement and its contents 1) with the Defendant and the Plaintiff on July 31, 2015 (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”) with the following terms: (a) the lease agreement between the Defendant and the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant lease agreement”) on the following terms: (b) 80,000,000,000,000,000,000,000: 48 months: 15,435,909,000

(1) Upon entering into the agreement of the Defendant, the movable property listed in No. 1 of the attached list (hereinafter referred to as “the lease property of this case”).

(2) The terms and conditions of the lease agreement of this case provide for the termination of the ownership of the leased property and the lease agreement as follows:

Article 3. Responsibilities of Customers. (2) Ownership of leased articles shall be held by financial companies, and customers shall have only the right to benefit from use.

Article 20 In cases where a customer prior to the termination of a contract by a financial company delays monthly rent more than two consecutive times, the financial company may request the customer to terminate the contract after notifying the customer of the fact that the performance of the contract was delayed and the termination thereof is three business days prior to the date of termination of the contract, and where the customer is not notified three business days prior to the date of termination of the contract, the date three business days after the date of actual notice arrives shall be deemed the

C. On the other hand, on July 31, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant are each movable property listed in the [Attachment 2 and 3] attached Table 2 and 3 owned by the Defendant to secure the Defendant’s obligation under the instant lease agreement (hereinafter “instant movable property”).

As to the secured obligation amounting to KRW 370,000,000 (hereinafter “instant security agreement”) is called the instant security agreement.

B. In concluding the transfer security, the Defendant occupied the instant transfer security property by means of the occupancy revision, but the Plaintiff demanded to enforce the transfer security right due to the Defendant’s nonperformance of obligation.

arrow