beta
Text
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
Basic Facts
The court's explanation on this part is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (section 2, No. 12, No. 7, and No. 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance). Thus, the court's explanation on this part is based on the summary of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure
Plaintiff
The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this part of the argument is as follows: (a) the relevant part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the relevant part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance (Articles 7-6 and 16 of the judgment of the first instance), and thus, (b) the same is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
On the 7th page 12, the phrase "shall be legally responsible" has been put into effect "(the foregoing arrangement shall be concluded by the defendant on an equal footing with the plaintiff and shall be respected accordingly)."
The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this part of the judgment on the claim under a contract is as stated in the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance (Articles 7, 18, and 18), except for adding a part of the judgment of the first instance and adding a part of the same, and therefore, this part of the judgment is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Part 8 4 provides that "The plaintiff's argument that the accident in this case was caused by the defendant's prior mistake in the control and management area is not acceptable)", "as seen in paragraph 4 below."
In Part 8, Paragraph 9, " is deemed null and void," so even if the plaintiff's negligence of supervision over the defendant was recognized in the relevant criminal judgment, it is deemed that the plaintiff is responsible for the negligence of supervision in an external relationship, and it is against the plaintiff on the ground of the negligence of supervision in an internal relationship with the defendant who committed a mistake by deceiving the plaintiff.