보증금
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.
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: " from Scco Construction" in Section 2, Section 14, Section 2, Section 7, Section 21, Section 7, Section 21, Section 8, Section 9, Section 9 of the first instance court's decision, and "data and data" are added to "documents submitted" in Section 8, Section 9 of the first instance court's decision, and the following documents are the same as the reasons for the first instance court's decision, except for addition of the decision as to the plaintiff's assertion added in the first instance court's decision as described in Section 2, Section 420, Section 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination on the Plaintiff’s assertion added in the trial room
A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant continued to hold a joint and several surety with the plaintiff that he/she cannot pay a security deposit to the plaintiff. Rather, he/she had a joint and several surety employed to conduct a consultation with the plaintiff. Accordingly, the plaintiff did not file a lawsuit because he/she decided that the defendant had an intention to conduct a review or a consultation for the payment of a security deposit. Thus, it constitutes an abuse of rights against the principle of trust and good faith to assert that the extinctive prescription has expired.
B. In order to deny the exercise of rights on the ground that the exercise of rights is against the principle of good faith, good faith was provided to the other party.
In light of the concept of justice, the other party’s exercise of rights against the other party’s good faith should have become in a state where the other party’s belief is objectively unreasonable, and the exercise of rights against such other party’s belief should have reached such an irrecoverable state.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da90160 Decided August 19, 2010). If the exercise of a right can be seen as an abuse of a right, a person who exercises a right merely gives pain to the other party and causes damages to the other party.