(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.07.11 2017나10877

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) 대구지방법원 2018.07.11 2017나10877

약정금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire argument in Gap evidence No. 1 as to the cause of the claim, the defendant's statement of payment stating that "5,810,000 won shall be paid to the plaintiff by February 28, 2011 and shall be held liable for civil and criminal liability when the plaintiff fails to perform his/her duty," is "the letter of payment in this case".

may be recognized that the preparation has been made.

According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 5,810,000 to the Plaintiff by February 28, 2011. Thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay KRW 5,810,000 to the Plaintiff and delay damages therefor.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. Defendant’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff forced the Defendant to prepare a letter of payment of this case, and the Defendant prepared and delivered the letter of payment of this case to the Plaintiff under no choice but to do so. Thus, the instant letter of payment has no effect (hereinafter “instant letter of payment”).

(2) Since the Defendant agreed with the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff would not be liable for the implementation of the instant payment note while preparing and delivering the instant payment note to the Plaintiff, the instant payment rejection is invalid.

(2) After the filing of the instant lawsuit, the Defendant paid KRW 1,480,000 out of KRW 5,810,000 under the instant payment note to the Plaintiff via C (hereinafter “Chapter 3”).

(B) B. 1) The Defendant’s assertion is without merit, inasmuch as there is no evidence to deem that there was coercion, as alleged by the Defendant, at the time of drawing up the instant letter of rejection of payment.

2) (2) There is no evidence to deem that there was an agreement as alleged by the Defendant at the time of the preparation of the instant written request for payment. (3) The Defendant’s allegation is without merit. (3) The Defendant’s claim regarding KRW 5,810,000 based on the instant written request for payment as to the claim.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원성남지원 2017.05.12 2016가단210282

-대전지방법원 2017.03.30 2016가단209334

-청주지방법원 제천지원 2018.06.27 2017가단2706

-창원지방법원 2021.04.16 2019나66450

-대구지방법원 2017.09.28 2017나4155