logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.01.19 2017나2035678
손해배상
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is all 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 judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the portion as in paragraph (2), and therefore, the reasoning of the judgment is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Parts of scraping;

(a) 5 pages 9 of the judgment of the first instance court "Seoul High Court 2014No49823" shall be added to "Seoul High Court 2014Na49823".

(b) The description of the nine to eleven (one) of the decision of the court of first instance shall be written in the following manner:

Article 6(3) of the instant contract provides that “Defendant B shall transfer customer information (name of the policyholder, subscription date, contact address, address) and customer counseling and customer experience-related data with the consent of the customer in handling A/S.” The meaning of the said provision does not mean that “where Defendant B sells the instant product to the customer, it shall transfer information, etc. on the customer’s purchase to the Plaintiff,” but it means that “where Defendant B provides the instant product to some of the customers, it shall transfer information, etc. on the customer’s purchase to the Plaintiff with the consent of the customer.” However, it is difficult to view that Defendant B intentionally neglected to collect information on the customer with the consent of the customer, or collected information on the customer with the consent of the customer and did not transfer information on the customer counseling and customer experience to the Plaintiff.”

(c) The inside part of 12 pages 18 through 21 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be described as follows:

"On the other hand, according to the evidence mentioned above, the contract of this case is ordered by Article 7 (2).

arrow