logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.01.23 2018나210813
대여금
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 judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for modification, deletion, or addition as follows.

In the first instance judgment, the part 21 of the judgment of the court of first instance asserts that “A evidence Nos. 1 and 1 evidence Nos. 1” was changed to “A evidence Nos. 1 and 1 evidence Nos. 4 in front of “210,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,0000,000,0000 won” as follows. The part 21 of the judgment of the court of first instance asserts that “the Plaintiff borrowed the above money to the Defendant,” and the Defendant stated that “the money kept in custody of the Defendant on the ground that the Plaintiff was subject to seizure in the event of a

The evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to deem that the plaintiff lent the above money to the defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The parts related to the dialogues divided by the Defendant on February 9, 2018 and divided by the Defendant on February 3 through 11, 2018 shall be as follows: “Nos. 1 and 2” shall be changed to “Nos. 1 and 2”; “Nos. 3 and 3” to “Nos. 3 and 3” to “No. 3”; “No. 100 million won shall be changed to “No. 3”; “No. 3 or 4” to “No. 3 or 3”; “No. 100 million won shall be changed to “No. 3 or 3”;

was required to do so

Plaintiff: He et al.

Defendant: He was aware of the fact.

In sound, it is necessary to judge whether there is only the amount of punishment, "I am the amount of punishment," or not.

shall not be held

The inside of a sound studio

In addition, “A” and “A” and “A” and “A” are changed to “A” and “A” and “A” as “A” and “A” and the voice of No. 3 are changed to “A” and the voice of No. 1 and 2, respectively, and the voice of No. 3” of No. 4, 17-18 et al.

2. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is without merit.

arrow