beta
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.09.21 2016나4222

차임등

Text

1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the judgment, is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following changes, and thus, it is acceptable as it is by the main sentence of Article 420

From the 2nd side of the changed part, "to waive the object" shall be made by "to waive the object, to accept any measure."

The evidence referred to in paragraphs (7) and (8) shall add “B Nos. 7 and 8” to the evidence produced at the bottom of 3.

From the 3rd to the 2nd half, “The instant real estate was flooded habitually from the 2011., but the Defendant did not do so and did not request the Plaintiff to repair the instant building or compensate the Plaintiff for damages.” Rather, as seen earlier, the Defendant did not seem to have delayed the surrender of the instant building and did not follow the promise, and did so by stating that the Defendant would waive all the articles and accept any measures if the promise is not complied with.”

On July 29, 2015, the Defendant drafted a letter of July 29, 2015 (Evidence A 2) in accordance with the Plaintiff’s strong pressure to dispose of all houses and goods owned by the Defendant without immediate payment. On August 20, 2015, the loan certificate and each letter (Evidence A 1 and 3) were unilaterally prepared by the Plaintiff and signed only without being fully aware of the details thereof. This is due to the Defendant’s use of the old state where the tenant is a tenant, and thus, such a letter and loan certificate are invalid.

However, at the time when the documents submitted by the defendant alone were prepared, the plaintiff coerciond the defendant at the time the above letter and the loan certificate was prepared.

It is not sufficient to recognize that the defendant has been inevitably prepared in his or her old meaning, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Furthermore, after the Plaintiff received the above documents from the Defendant, the Defendant, the lessee of the building, as the cause of the instant claim, ①.