logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.08.24 2016나754
대여금
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts contained in this Court;

A. On May 24, 2006, the court of first instance requested the Defendant to pay money stated in the purport of the claim by means of lending money to the Defendant. On May 24, 2006, the court of first instance delivered a copy of the complaint, notice of the date of pleading, etc. to the Defendant by public notice, and rendered a judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim in whole, and served the original copy of the judgment by means

B. On January 17, 2016, the Defendant knew that the judgment of the first instance became final and conclusive, and filed an appeal to the said judgment on January 27, 2016.

C. The record of trial in the first instance court was discarded after the preservation period, and the first instance court did not state the reasons in the judgment in accordance with the Trial of Small Claims Act. The Plaintiff did not appear in the court even after being served with a duplicate of the petition of appeal, notice of the first and second date for pleading, etc., and did not present in the court, and did not comply with this court’s explanation.

2. As seen above, the court cannot find out what the cause of the instant claim was and there is no evidence to find the cause of the claim. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed, and the judgment of the court of first instance, which has different conclusions, is unfair, so it is revoked and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow