beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the addition of the following judgments as to the matters alleged in the court of first instance, and therefore, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional matters to be determined;
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that although the Plaintiff was rendered a favorable judgment by asserting that the lessee of the letter of apology as indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the letter of apology”) was B in the case of claim for building name map No. 2010Gahap4100, which the Plaintiff filed against C, the Plaintiff asserted that the lessee of the letter of apology as indicated in the separate sheet was the lessee of the instant letter of apology after the said judgment became final and conclusive and was paid business compensation from the Defendant on August 20, 2013. Since the above acts of the Plaintiff cannot be permitted against the principle of the letter of apology, it is invalid that the Defendant paid the above business compensation to C, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the above business compensation to B.
B. Determination: (a) the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C claiming delivery of the instant friendship as the District Court Decision 2010Kahap41000, which was concluded between the Plaintiff and C on August 20, 2013; (b) the Plaintiff asserted that C was one of its own sons in the litigation proceedings of the instant case; (c) the said court accepted C’s assertion and rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on November 11, 2010; and (d) the fact that the said judgment became final and conclusive on December 20, 2010 is significant in this court; and (c) the Defendant paid KRW 64,000,000 as business compensation for the instant friendship to C claiming as the de facto lessee of the instant friendship on August 20, 2013. However, there was no dispute between the parties, on the sole basis of the foregoing, the Defendant paid the said business compensation to C.
or the defendant's above business compensation against B.