손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is that of the court of first instance, except for adding the following judgments to the defendant's main defense of safety, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420
(2) The plaintiff's grounds for appeal do not differ significantly from the argument in the first instance court, and in light of the evidence submitted in the first instance court, the fact finding and judgment in the first instance court are deemed legitimate). 2. The defendant did not object to the decision of recommending reconciliation in the retrial case No. 2015 Jae-Na262, Busan District Court Decision No. 2015 J. 262. This is a defense that the plaintiff, an employee of C, must be deemed to have settled that he did not raise any civil or criminal objection, including the defendant's claim for damages caused by the defendant's perjury. Thus, the lawsuit of this case filed in violation of this principle shall be dismissed as an abuse
In the above retrial case, on September 20, 2016, the Busan District Court rendered a ruling of recommending reconciliation containing that "the plaintiff and C shall not raise any civil or criminal objection against the other party in connection with the instant case," and the plaintiff and C did not raise any objection, which became final and conclusive at that time may be recognized by the entries of evidence No. 5 and substantial facts in this court. However, the meaning of the above father-C agreement between the plaintiff and C included in the decision of recommending reconciliation is interpreted as not raising any civil or criminal objection against the defendant as alleged by the defendant, or there is no ground to deem that the above father-C agreement has effect on the defendant, not the party to the retrial case.
Therefore, the defendant's defense of the above principal safety is without merit.
3. The judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.