logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.11.15 2018나2039578
부당이득반환 등
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

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 concerning this case is as follows, and this case is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for modification and addition as follows.

(In full view of the allegations by the Plaintiff and the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, it is reasonable to establish and determine the first instance court’s fact-finding and determination. The amendment to “ January 4, 2017” in Part 9 of the first instance judgment to “ January 14, 2017.”

Then, the first instance judgment No. 10 of the first instance judgment provides for the following grounds: “The Plaintiff shall seek the return of the Plaintiff’s money” (this court supplements the argument that Defendant E has embezzled or occupied the Plaintiff’s money or check “Embezzlement” or “illegal possession for qualification” or “illegal tort (Disbursement)”; it is also determined to the effect that the Plaintiff seeks the payment of the amount by exercising the right to claim compensation for damages or the right to claim the return of unjust enrichment based on the aforementioned act).”

Part 13, part 16, and part 17 of the judgment of the first instance shall be amended to "N, the president," "N, the president of which".

Article 15 of the first instance judgment provides that “A resolution of a general meeting is required” in Part 18 of the judgment of the court of first instance (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2004Da44971, Sept. 15, 2005; Supreme Court Decision 201Da1129, 112305, Feb. 13, 2014; Supreme Court Decision 201Da11299, 112305, Feb. 13, 2014). In this case, the Plaintiffs’ assertion that “Although the instant lawsuit does not constitute an act of managing and disposing collective ownership property, the resolution of the general meeting is unnecessary” is added, barring any special circumstance, such as that the articles of incorporation provide otherwise (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da44971, Sept. 15, 2005

On the 16th page of the first instance judgment, "The 8th day of December 1, 2005" is "the 16th day of December. 2005."

arrow