(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2020.11.19 2020나42160

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) 서울서부지방법원 2020.11.19 2020나42160

기타(금전)

Text

Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs who are ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. As to this part of the basic facts of the court of first instance, the reasons why this court should explain are as follows: “2.32 billion won” of the third 6th 6th son of the court of first instance; “the plaintiff and the defendant” of the 3th 6th son of the court of first instance shall be deemed as “the plaintiff and the defendant”; “the defendant” of the 1st 3th son shall be deemed as “F”; “the above case shall be pending in the appellate court after appeal. The appellate court rendered a ruling dismissing all appeals of both the plaintiffs and F on September 18, 2020 (this Court Decision 2019Na38769). The court of first 4th 3-4th son of the court of first instance shall be amended to “the above judgment became final and conclusive; and the 4th 4th 5th / 45th / [founded grounds] shall be deemed to have been deleted; and the corresponding part of the court of first instance shall be deemed to have added the number No. 6(A, hereinafter the same).

2. Determination as to the plaintiffs' claims

A. On the delivery date of the instant real estate, the Plaintiffs sought payment of the amount stated in the purport of the claim against the Defendant as the settlement amount following the delivery of the instant real estate. The Defendant asserted that there is no dispute over the delivery of the instant real estate on October 27, 2018 due to the confession by the Plaintiffs, and the Plaintiffs asserted that the confession was revoked, and thus, the Plaintiffs first live in this regard.

When the other party has not consented to the confession in court, the confession may be revoked in cases where the confession has been proved that the confession does not conform to the truth and that the confession is due to mistake.

At this time, the fact that the truth is not consistent with the truth can be proved by direct evidence, but it is possible to confirm indirect facts that the confession is not consistent with the truth.

In addition, there is proof that confession is contrary to the truth, and the confession is caused by mistake.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-대법원 2015.08.27 2013다67679

-대법원 2017.06.19 2017다214701

-의정부지방법원 2021.04.01 2019나218265

-대법원 2000. 9. 8. 선고 2000다23013 판결

-서울고등법원 2017.11.17 2017나2022382