대여금
1. The plaintiff (the quasi-Appellant)'s appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Quasi-Review Plaintiff).
1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and according to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court of first instance, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are recognized
Therefore, the reasoning of this court is as follows, except for the substitution of the three to five pages 1 through 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows, and therefore, it is accepted by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “when the false statement by a witness, expert witness, interpreter, or the false statement by a party or legal representative has become evidence of a judgment” under Article 451(1)8 of the replaced part of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “when the judgment has been changed by a different judgment or administrative disposition, such as a civil or criminal judgment, or any other judgment or disposition, which forms the basis of the judgment, has been changed by another judgment or administrative disposition,” and subparagraph 9 of the same Article provides that “when
However, if the matters agreed upon between the parties are entered in the mediation date, the mediation protocol has the same effect as the judicial compromise, and such mediation is established through litigation to terminate the dispute through mutual concession, and there is no room to intervene in the fact-finding or legal judgment of the court. Thus, there is no ground for quasi-deliberation falling under Article 451(1)7, 8, and 9 of the Civil Procedure Act with respect to such mediation protocol (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 63Da136, Oct. 31, 1963; 2004Da55087, Feb. 17, 2005; 2003Da55936, Jun. 24, 2005). Moreover, there is no evidence that there is no ground for quasi-adjudication falling under Article 451(1)7, 8, and 9 of the Civil Procedure Act among the circumstances asserted by the Plaintiff as the ground for quasi-adjudication.
Article 451 of the Civil Procedure Act.