손해배상
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the subsequent order of payment shall be revoked.
2...
1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the basic facts are as follows. This part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of the first instance is as stated in the part of the "1. Recognition". Thus, this part is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
On the two pages of the judgment of the first instance court, the two to three pages are as follows.
(1) Defendant C, on September 22, 2013, which had been conducting an auction on the warehouse buildings owned by E, which were kept by E, and transferred the E, etc., to the warehouse of Defendant B located in F in Yangyang-si. When the Plaintiff demanded the return of the E, Defendant C did not receive KRW 5,315,58 out of the price of the dental medicine supplied to the Plaintiff by October 18, 2012, and rejected the return thereof, Defendant C’s 15-16 portion of the first instance judgment, “Defendant C appealed appealed and is currently pending in the appellate trial,” and the said court appealed the above judgment as 2015No43,00,000, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on June 11, 2015 by the first instance court 3, 2015.” Meanwhile, the said judgment became final and conclusive by the Defendants at the first instance judgment [30,000,000).”
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) around September 22, 2013, Defendant C transferred the instant Egyptium owned by the Plaintiff to Defendant B’s warehouse, and thereafter, Defendant C committed a tort refusing to return the instant Egyptium by June 6, 2014, which included the Defendant’s intent to return, from that point of time reaches the Plaintiff.