손해배상(기)
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. Interpretation of a juristic act is clearly confirming the objective meaning that the party gave to the act of indicating it. In a case where an interpretation of a juristic act indicated in a disposal document is at issue, it shall be reasonably interpreted in accordance with logical and empirical rules, comprehensively taking into account the form and content of the text, the motive and background of the juristic act, the purpose and genuine intent of the party to achieve by the juristic act
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Da60065, May 27, 2005; 201Da53645, Oct. 27, 2011; 201Da53652, Oct. 27, 2011). In addition, the court shall determine whether the assertion of facts is true in accordance with logical and empirical rules based on the ideology of social justice and equity by free evaluation of evidence, taking into account the overall purport of pleadings and the result of examination of evidence (Article 202 of the Civil Procedure Act). The lower court’s judgment did not exceed the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, and thus,
(Article 432 of the same Act). 2. The lower court determined as follows on the grounds stated in its reasoning.
Since the transfer contract of this case in the holding of the court below is a contract for which the plaintiff transferred or taken over the part of the defendant's electrical construction business and decided to follow the procedures for division and merger, the transfer contract of this case did not establish the transfer contract of this case solely on the ground that
shall not be deemed to be null and void.
B. Since there is a lack of evidence to support that the Plaintiff agreed to preferentially pay the amount of delinquent taxes to the Defendant before the registration of the transfer and acquisition by split at the time of the instant transfer and merger, the Defendant’s allegation of cancellation of the contract is without merit.
C. The transfer or acquisition contract of this case was rescinded by the defendant's refusal of performance.