beta
Text
1. Each appeal filed by the plaintiff and the defendant and the part on the plaintiff's claim for monetary payment added by this court are surrounding the appeal.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is as follows. The court shall correct the part which appears to be clearly clerical error in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance and the part which clearly states the meaning thereof. The judgment of the defendant on the argument that the defendant is particularly in the grounds of appeal is particularly in the court of first instance shall be added pursuant to Paragraph 2 below. The plaintiff's change in the grounds of appeal in this court is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the revision of each of the relevant parts in the judgment as stated in Paragraph
Correctioned Parts
A. Of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, 3 1, 1, 6 4, 6 4, 8 , 7 , 8 , 8 1, 5 , 10, 11 , 8 , 9 , and 9 1 , each of the “instant contract” in the part “instant contract”
B. Of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the 8th 5 and 6 portion of the 8th 5th 5 and 6 “a guarantee contract between the plaintiff and the defendant shall also be null and void. As such, there is no contract bond or equivalent damage liability of the plaintiff against the defendant. On the other hand, the performance guarantee insurance contract (contract) between the plaintiff and the Seoul Guarantee Insurance (hereinafter “instant guarantee insurance contract”) also becomes null and void because the previous contract of this case, which is its principal contract, constitutes false representation, is not subject to occurrence of an insurance accident, and thus, the insurance contract which fails to meet the requirements of good faith and good faith, shall be deemed null and void (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da20329, Mar. 26, 201
C. The grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows 8:
6. “16.16.1” part of “the same year”
6. 15. "
2. Judgment on the defendant's grounds for appeal
A. The gist of the claim is that Article 21(2) of the previous contract of this case is the contract bond when the contract is terminated due to certain reasons attributable to the Plaintiff.