logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.04.06 2016나6540
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal and the additional selective claims filed by this court are all dismissed.

2. The appeal costs are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The reasons for this Court’s acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except for the addition of the following judgments as to the matters asserted by the defendant in this Court, and therefore, they are quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the money paid to the defendant in this court was not an attorney-at-law appointment for the plaintiff, but a loan under the pretext of the progress of the case and the teaching expenses.

B. In light of the following circumstances that are acknowledged by the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence Nos. 1 through 3, namely, the Plaintiff’s issuance of the above money to the Defendant as an attorney-at-law title and demanded the submission of a receipt under the Plaintiff’s name; the Defendant demanded the return of the receipt; and the Defendant filed a complaint against the Defendant on the charge of not taking a disposition of non-prosecution; the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was to deliver the money under the name of the attorney-at-law from the filing to the closing of the first instance trial; and the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was to transfer the money under the name of the attorney-at-law from the first instance court to the closing of the first instance trial; and the Plaintiff’s claim was rejected due to the submission of the attorney-at-law fee receipt to the court of first instance, it is difficult to view that the above money was a new

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and it is dismissed as the plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's selective claim added by this court are without merit.

arrow