주택건설사업 사업자명의변경
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The reasoning of this court for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) by modifying “the Plaintiff’s new construction for Defendant A” in Part 6, Section 10 of the judgment of the court of first instance to “Defendant New Construction”; (b) from Part 8 to Part 9; and (c) from Part 10 to 18, Section 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance to Section 2, Section 3; and (c) except for the additional determination as to the Plaintiff’s assertion, it is identical to the entry in the judgment of the court of first instance in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The part after completion of the statute of limitations (No. 8 to No. 9 of the first instance trial) (3) The plaintiff, at the time of determination on the ground of the interruption of the statute of limitations, has defaulted with the payment of a large amount of debt to Defendant New Construction for the instant apartment construction. In order to solve this, the Shinsung Industrial Development discharged the status of the contractor under the first transfer contract of this case or the obligation of Defendant New Construction for the plaintiff. Thus, this is a defense that the statute of limitations has been interrupted as a result of the extension of the statute of limitations. The obligation assumption is a contract with the purpose of maintaining the identity of the obligation and transferring it to a third party from the former obligor. The underwriter assumes the same obligation as the former obligor upon replacement of the former obligor and at the same time bears the former obligor's obligation as the former obligor, and at the same time assumes the obligation relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da27476, Oct. 11, 1996).
Gap evidence 20, 23-.