공탁금출급청구권 확인 등의 소
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The grounds for appeal by the parties citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance shows the evidence submitted in this court, the judgment of the court of first instance is deemed legitimate.
The reasoning for this Court’s entry is as follows, excluding the parts used or added as follows, and thus, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance. As such, this Court cited the same as a summary under the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
2. On the 7th page of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the appeal to be accepted or added, the "this court" of the 4th shall be added to "the first instance court".
The following shall be added between the last 10th of the judgment of the first instance and the first 11th of the page:
As long as the authenticity of a document is recognized, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent as stated in the statement, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof that the content of the document is denied (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da76825, Jan. 27, 201). In order for a person to have a conspiracy with false indication under Article 108(1) of the Civil Act to constitute a conspiracy with false indication under Article 108(1) of the Civil Act, there must be an agreement between the other party and the other party as to the inconsistency (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Da17909, Sept. 4, 1998).
Nos. 12, 18, and 21 of the first instance judgment shall be followed as follows:
In light of the legal principles as seen earlier, “(3)”, however, the aforementioned evidence and the following facts and circumstances revealed by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings as stated in each of the above evidence Nos. 19 through 22, it is insufficient to recognize the monetary loan contract and the transfer contract of this case as the Plaintiff’s assertion that the monetary loan contract of this case constituted a false declaration of agreement, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it (this Decree, the monetary loan contract of this case).