(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.05.23 2017나50000

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) 창원지방법원 2017.05.23 2017나50000

청구이의

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. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the term “loan claim” was dismissed as “paid purchase price claim” during the second-class 14-15 of the judgment of the first instance; and (b) the reasoning of the judgment of the second-class 2 of the judgment of the first instance

(a)Paragraph 3;

B. 2) Except as follows, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the part concerning the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. 2. The dismissal part

A. 3) In addition, the Defendant received the claim of KRW 77,278,00 from C with respect to unpaid amount of KRW 77,278,00 from C and partly won in the relevant judgment, and thereafter partly won the claim of the instant judgment, and thus, the claim of the instant judgment was extinguished by the aforementioned repayment. (b) The Defendant’s claim of KRW D and E with respect to the claim of reimbursement and the claim of the instant judgment amount are different from that of the instant judgment amount. Therefore, in order to extinguish the claim of the instant judgment amount due to the said repayment, there is an agreement that the Defendant received the said claim from C to pay the instant judgment amount.

Therefore, this paper examines whether D and E paid the acquisition amount and damages for delay recognized in the relevant judgment, and whether the Defendant can be deemed to have received the above claim from C for the payment of the instant judgment.

First of all, if the defendant received the transfer money and its delay damages recognized in the related judgment D and E from D and E, according to the respective statements of D 34,35,46,48, and 49, D 7,712,142 won to the defendant on July 20, 2006, E 39,603,50 won to the defendant on October 39, 2006, and E 25,00,000,000 won to the defendant on July 31, 201;

8. It can be acknowledged that the account transfer of KRW 562,079 was made on November 1, 201. Meanwhile, according to Gap's statement 45, the defendant and E were the defendant on August 11, 2006 decision of Changwon District Court 2004Da46604.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2019.02.20 2018고단2155

-수원지방법원 2018.05.16 2017나76289

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.13 2015가단4649

-서울동부지방법원 2020.10.20 2020가단128658

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.08.13 2020가단5101358