(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.02.06 2018나86931

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.02.06 2018나86931

물품대금

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the Plaintiff’s modification or addition of the allegations added or emphasized by this court. Therefore, the relevant part of the reasoning of the judgment of first instance is cited pursuant to the main sentence

2. The revised part of the judgment of the court of first instance raises the “ro” of the second 6th of the judgment as “production”.

"53,861,500 won" in the second nine-party judgment of the first instance shall be added "(including value-added tax; hereinafter referred to as "value-added tax") to the following:

The second 19th 19th 2nd 19th 19th judgment "Evidences 1, 4 through 7, 8, and 13 of A" shall be "Evidence 1, 4 through 7, 8, 13, and 14 of A".

The second 19th 19th 19th 2th 19th 2th 19th 19th 2th 19th 2th 2th 2th 2th 3th 3th 200

The third and nine types of judgment of the first instance court " is the same company," and they are jointly and severally with E because they leased their names to the same company or E.

The evidence in the third 14th 14th eth 1st eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth e.

The third 19th 19th am "this court" shall be deemed "the first instance court".

Then, “The fact that the Defendant has issued a tax invoice in the name of “B” shall be added to “the fact that the Defendant has entered” in the third 21th of the judgment of the first instance.

The fourth instance judgment of the first instance court was completed nine (9) pages, and confirmed by I, an on-site warden.

After the fourth end of the judgment of the first instance, the following shall be added.

⑤ Even according to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant requested the Defendant to conclude a contract with G in the name of the Defendant with the knowledge that the instant construction cannot be carried out by the licenses of the Defendant, even if the Defendant first intended to become a contracting party to the instant construction, and the Defendant consented thereto, thereby reverting the rights and obligations under the instant contract

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2020.02.06 2018나86931

-서울고등법원 2017.11.03 2014나2001506

-수원고등법원 2020.09.17 2019나21848

-서울고등법원 2018.02.02 2017나2062182

-부산고등법원 2020.11.11 2019나57995