beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.07.16 2018나2062424

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is partly modified as follows, and the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except for the addition under paragraph 2.

Therefore, it is accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3면 표 내 5행의 “주엥서”를 “중에서”로 고친다.

The 5th parallel 13th parallel 13th parallel 1st parallel 6th parallel 1st parallel 1st parallel 1st parallel 1st parallel 1st parallel

“ [Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap’s 2 through 8, 12, 24, 26 through 31, 33 through 36, 47, 49, 52 through 55, Eul’s 2, 13 through 16, and 20 evidence (including provisional number; hereinafter the same shall apply)

Each entry, video, and the purport of the entire pleadings are as follows: 6 pages 10 to 15.

“2) The non-litigation agreement on the relevant legal doctrine is a serious litigation law, such as the waiver of the right to a trial guaranteed under the Constitution, and is effective as to the circumstances anticipated at the time of the agreement, and is limited to a specific legal relationship within the scope of the right to be disposed of by the parties to the agreement. In the event the parties to the agreement may have different opinions on the existence or scope of the validity, it shall be determined after a reasonable interpretation of the parties’ intention.

(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da63988 Decided March 26, 199, and Supreme Court Decision 201Da80449 Decided November 28, 2013, etc.). In light of the following circumstances, it is insufficient to recognize that there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the instant agreement and the evidence submitted by the Defendant not to claim civil damages due to the refusal of official approval in 209, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2013, and 2015.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

① The instant agreement is pending in the appellate court after the judgment of the first instance court in favor of the Plaintiff in the lawsuit seeking nullification of the Plaintiff’s refusal of official approval in 2015.