물품대금
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the court shall decide whether the allegation of facts is true in accordance with logical and empirical rules on the basis of social justice and the principle of equity by free evaluation of evidence, taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings and the result of the examination of evidence (Article 202 of the Civil Procedure Act). The fact duly confirmed by the court of final appeal that the judgment below did not exceed
(1) The court below rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff is a co-defendant C (hereinafter referred to as “C”) of the first instance court, and that the Defendant is a substantial counter-party. The court below rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion that the actual counter-party is a co-defendant C (hereinafter referred to as “C”) of the first instance court.
The ground of appeal disputing the fact-finding that led to the judgment of the court below is merely an error in the selection of evidence and the determination of the value of evidence belonging to the free trial of the fact-finding court, and thus, it cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal
In addition, even after examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding public notice or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.
2. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, determined that it is difficult to recognize that the Defendant guaranteed the whole amount of the original obligation to the Plaintiff C.
The judgment below
In light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the interpretation of a legal act or by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.
3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against it.