(영문) 전주지방법원 2019.12.20 2018나11322

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) 전주지방법원 2019.12.20 2018나11322

보증금반환

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 2007, the Plaintiff leased from C the real estate located in Seongdong-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City as the deposit amount of KRW 40 million, monthly rent of KRW 1 million, and thereafter, the Plaintiff operated the “Seoul Special Metropolitan City Deputy Director (hereinafter “the instant Third Vice Director”)” in the said real estate.

B. The Defendant, who is the Plaintiff’s birth, worked as an employee of the Third Deputy Director, was registered as a business operator on July 1, 2008 as to the Third Deputy Director, and was transferred from the Plaintiff to the lessee’s status as the contractor on the Third Deputy Director around June 30, 2016, and has been operated by the Third Deputy Director.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. On June 30, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff should pay KRW 40 million to the Plaintiff, on the condition that the Defendant would receive KRW 40 million from the Defendant. As such, the Plaintiff transferred to the Defendant the instant Deputy Director, the Defendant should pay the Plaintiff KRW 40 million.

B. In light of the above, it is difficult to believe that part of the evidence Nos. 3, 6, and 8, which the plaintiff believed to support the facts of the agreement, are written in Gap's evidence Nos. 4, 5, 9, and 15, and testimony of the witness F of this court is insufficient to recognize them. The plaintiff's above assertion is without merit, since there is no other evidence to acknowledge the facts of the agreement.

3. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case must be dismissed for lack of reasonable grounds.

The judgment of the first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2015.10.16 2014나9911

-대전지방법원천안지원 2019.04.24 2018가단9124

-춘천지방법원원주지원 2015.08.19 2015가단31383

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2018.05.10 2017가합406

-서울남부지방법원 2016.11.24 2016가합100462