beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. The Defendants deliver the vehicles listed in [Attachment];
B. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable for 749,120 won.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On February 15, 2012, the Plaintiff purchased an automobile indicated in attached Form D (hereinafter “instant automobile”) owned by Defendant B as the head of Defendant B and his father, the father of Defendant C (hereinafter “the instant automobile”). On February 17, 2012, the Plaintiff received the transfer of ownership on the instant automobile due to the said sale.
B. Although the Plaintiff was registered to transfer ownership on the instant motor vehicle, the Plaintiff was not able to receive the instant motor vehicle according to the Defendants’ use of the instant motor vehicle. However, during the said period, the Plaintiff was imposed a total of KRW 537,120 in automobile tax (the portion for the first period in January, 2012 and the second period in February, 2012) and KRW 212,000 in total (42,00 in speed violations on June 21, 2012; KRW 40,000 in violation of parking and stopping regulations on December 10, 2012; KRW 8,000 in violation of parking and stopping regulations on December 11, 2012; KRW 32,000 in violation of parking and stopping regulations on December 13, 2012; KRW 40,000 in total,00 in total; KRW 135, May 20, 2013).
C. On June 17, 2012, the Plaintiff lent KRW 1,000,000 to Defendant B (transfer to Defendant C’s account) and repaid KRW 1,000,000 out of the lease deposit against E on July 18, 2012.
Defendant B purchased Oraba from the Plaintiff and did not pay KRW 556,300 out of the price, and is engaged in the Do and retail business under the name of Defendant C with the permission of Defendant C, and purchased Orabab in the name of Defendant C and did not pay KRW 2,278,400 out of the price.
[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 6-10 (including each number), Gap evidence 11-2, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the facts of recognition under paragraph (1) of Article 1, the Defendants did not deliver the instant vehicle to the Plaintiff even though they sold the instant vehicle to the Plaintiff and had the Plaintiff complete the ownership transfer registration in the future of the Plaintiff from the owner D.