logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.09.08 2017나42804
손해배상(기)
Text

1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the principal lawsuit, and appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim.

Reasons

1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff and the defendant to the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance is reviewed again, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of

Therefore, the court's explanation on this case is as follows: ① the testimony of the witness D's testimony of the first instance court No. 4, 12 of the judgment of the first instance court as "the testimony of the witness D'; ② the testimony of the witness D's partial testimony of the fifth 2 of the second 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 16th 5th 5th 5th E's testimony of the witness E's witness E'; ② the date of the sixth 4th 6th 4th 4th 6th 6th 4th 6th 4th 6th 6th 6th 4th 6th 6th 6th 4th 6th 6th 6th 4th 6th 6th 6th 1st 1st 5th 2th 6th 1st 2th 2th 196th 2th 2th 2th 2007.

2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion and determination 1) Plaintiff’s assertion (i) the settlement data of March 2015 submitted by the Defendant (No. 25, hereinafter “instant settlement data”).

) Some mobile communications terminal devices sold by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “portable phones”) are merely an internal electronic data of the Defendant, based thereon.

2) The name of the subscriber was stolen, or the Defendant’s name was stolen, and the Defendant’s patent corporation (hereinafter “Ecom”).

(2) Even if the name of a part of the mobile phone purchaser sold by the Plaintiff was stolen, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to be a “unfair sale” even if it was not due to negligence on the part of the mobile phone user, such as the confirmation of the identity of the mobile phone user, and such sales cannot be deemed to be a “unfair sale.” As such, the Defendant should not deduct the above indemnity from the settlement amount to be paid to the Plaintiff.

arrow