화해이행금
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant shall be revoked.
2. The plaintiff's claim as to the above cancellation part is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal filed the instant appeal against the Defendant, which was recognized by the first instance court, with the claim based on the Seoul High Court Decision 2011Na9682 (Main Office), 201Na969 (Counterclaim), against the Plaintiff as the automatic claim, to set off the instant claim against the Plaintiff against an equal amount.
(2) The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where “a fact-finding” and “a decision on the cause of claim” as referred to in the judgment of the court of first instance is deemed to be “ July 2, 2014.” As such, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, inasmuch as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is deemed to be “a fact-finding” and “a decision on the cause of claim” as referred to in the judgment of the court of first instance on July 2, 201.
3. According to Gap evidence No. 15 of the defendant's counterclaim and the purport of all pleadings, the appellate court of the lawsuit (the first instance court: the Seoul Western District Court 2010Gahap1685, 201Gahap10242 (Counterclaim), the payment of settlement penalty: Seoul High Court 201Na9682, 201Na969 (Counterclaim), and the appellate court: the first instance court of August 24, 2012 changed the judgment of 111,598,346 and 55,79,173 won among these and 205,79,173 won from January 25, 2011 to October 14, 2011; 200 per annum5% from the following day to the date of complete payment; 30% from the day of the above trial to 2015Da21481, May 27, 2015; 2015Da325797, respectively.
The term “when the obligation becomes due” under Article 492(1) of the Civil Act refers to “when the obligation becomes due.”