logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2018.02.21 2017나490
매매대금
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

Reasons

1. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. On November 13, 2013, when the Defendants paid KRW 5,00,000 to the Plaintiff’s unpaid electrical charges with Defendant C, a director in-house of Defendant B Co., Ltd., the Plaintiff agreed to transfer the Plaintiff’s vehicle to the Defendants, and transferred the Plaintiff’s vehicle to the Defendants on the same day.

However, in the process of settling the sales contract for real estate owned by the Plaintiff, which was concluded on November 2013 with E, the representative director of the Plaintiff, Defendant C transferred the unpaid electricity charges of KRW 5,000,000 paid by the Defendants to the Plaintiff in accordance with the above forkive transfer contract, and did not pay the proceeds of the transfer to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the plaintiff 5,00,000 won for the transfer price and damages for delay.

B. On November 13, 2013, the Plaintiff: (a) transferred, without compensation, dried ginseng owned by the Plaintiff to Defendant Company B; (b) on February 11, 2015, the Plaintiff acquired it again in KRW 37,000,000, around February 11, 2015.

However, Defendant C arbitrarily stolen 600 km out of the above dry Sea.

Therefore, Defendant C is obligated to pay 30,000,000 won and damages for delay equivalent to the market price of the stolen sea, and Defendant C is liable to compensate the above amount as the employer of Defendant C.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 5 and 8’s respective statements and arguments as to the claim for the purchase price, the fact that the Defendants agreed to transfer the Plaintiff’s share to the Defendants instead of paying KRW 5,000,000 to the Plaintiff’s representative director E and Defendant C around November 2013 is recognized.

However, the fact that the Defendants paid all the unpaid electricity charges of the Plaintiff according to the agreement is recognized by the Plaintiff. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is that the said unpaid electricity charges paid by the Defendants are transferred to the Plaintiff.

arrow