logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2017.02.09 2016가단208312
매매대금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 15,676,978 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from July 22, 2016 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) On January 28, 2012, the Plaintiff is a DNA franchise bus (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) registered in the name of Hyundai High Speed Co., Ltd. by Nonparty C on January 28, 2012.

2) The Plaintiff entered into a contract with Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. to purchase KRW 45,000,000. (2) In order to pay the purchase price of the instant vehicle, the Plaintiff received a installment loan of KRW 45,000,000 from Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd.

3) On November 1, 2012, the Defendant purchased the instant vehicle from the Plaintiff, and the Defendant drafted a vehicle sales contract with the purport that the Defendant would acquire the remaining installment loans from the said Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. with the purchase price. 4) The said remaining installment loans remain in KRW 15,676,978 as of July 3, 2013, and the Defendant refused to acquire or repay the said remaining installment loans.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of determination, in lieu of the acquisition of the remaining installment loans with the purchase price of the instant vehicle, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remaining installment loans of KRW 15,676,978 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from July 22, 2016 to the date following the delivery of the copy of the instant complaint to the date of full payment.

2. Although the defendant alleged that the contract of this case was prepared as an example, the evidence submitted by the defendant alone is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the defendant's argument about this is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow