logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안양지원 2018.11.30 2018가단4855
공탁금 양도 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The description of the grounds for the claim shall be as specified in the attached Form;

2. Determination

A. No. 12 of the judgment on the cause of the claim is a written statement of the Plaintiff’s wife, and it is difficult to believe that the statement was made, and there is no evidence to prove that there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant that the Defendant would pay the Plaintiff’s legal reserve by transferring the money listed in the attached Table 1 to the Plaintiff.

On a different premise, the prior plaintiff's claim of this case cannot be accepted.

B. Where the judgment party on the application for resumption of oral argument applied for resumption of oral argument to submit proof of argument after the closing of oral argument, the issue of whether to accept the application is within the court’s discretion in principle

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da20532 Decided October 28, 2010, etc.). From May 29, 2018, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on May 29, 2018 to November 16, 2018, the date for pleading was in progress three times in total. The Plaintiff submitted a preparatory document and filed an application for fact inquiry or request for the delivery of documents, and subsequently came to the adoption reply, and thereafter, was given a full opportunity for proof of assertion, such as submitting an application for change of the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim, changing the cause of the claim, and submitting a documentary evidence.

In light of the progress of the hearing of the instant case, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff was unable to fully have the opportunity to submit the allegation due to the circumstances that were difficult to impose responsibility on him prior to the closing of argument, and there is no reason to deem that the instant court was obligated to resume the pleading and to try the instant case

Therefore, we cannot accept the plaintiff's application for resumption of argument.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow