beta
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019. 06. 27. 선고 2019나30642 판결

이 사건 항소는 부적법한 항소로서 그 흠을 보정할 수 없는 경우에 해당하므로 항소를 각하함이 타당함[국승]

Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul Western District Court-2015-Ban-40169 ( December 19, 2018)

Title

It is reasonable to dismiss the appeal since the appeal of this case is an unlawful appeal and it is not possible to correct the defects thereof.

Summary

The plaintiff's claim cannot be deemed to have been specified because the object of the claim is not clear, and the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim cannot be corrected in the appellate court. Thus, the appeal of this case is dismissed.

Related statutes

Article 249(1) of the Civil Procedure Act

Cases

2019Na30642 Claims, etc. for the performance of duty of compensation and rectification

Plaintiff

AA

Defendant

Republic of Korea and 4

Conclusion of Pleadings

Pleadings without Oral Proceedings

Imposition of Judgment

oly, 2019.27

Text

1. The appeal of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

Cheong-gu Office

The primary purport of the claim is that the Defendants jointly and severally pay 6,00,000 won to the Plaintiff (appointed parties; hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff”) and the Selected OO Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “OOO”) as well as 9% per annum from July 17, 2009 to the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

○ Preliminary Claim: Defendant KKKK Co., Ltd., and BBBB, jointly perform the obligation to rectify the tax amount of KRW 6,062,00 with the Plaintiff and the Selected OOO. Alternatively, Defendant Republic of Korea, CCC, and DD shall jointly and severally deliver (tax amount) the goods of KRW 6,000,00 (tax amount) to the Plaintiff and the Selected OOO, and shall pay a surcharge calculated at the rate of 20% per annum.

Reasons

Although the date of pleading has been three times in connection with the instant case, the part of the claim in this case cannot be seen as having been specified in the cause of the claim since it is impossible to ascertain that the Defendants, based on what factual basis and legal basis, bears the obligation to pay money to the Plaintiff and the OOOO, and the part seeking the delivery (return) and correction of the goods is not clear, and thus, the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim are specified.

Since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it and it is so decided as per Disposition.