logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.09.24 2019나30851
기타(금전)
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is that "(hereinafter "the contract of this case")" in the second 19 of the judgment of the court of second 1 is dismissed as "(hereinafter "the contract of this case") and "3. Judgment" in the judgment of the court of first 1 is partly the same as the part of the judgment of the court of first 1, except for the case in which the third 11 to 46 of the judgment of the court of first 16) is dismissed as follows. Thus, it is accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary Use]

3. The Plaintiff, at the time of entering into the instant subscription agreement, was unaware of the Plaintiff’s failure to return the Defendant’s proposal on November 14, 2016, and believed that the business progress would be possible according to the anticipated schedule set by the Defendant, as presented by the Plaintiff, is an error in motive regarding the instant subscription agreement. However, in order to cancel a juristic act on the ground that mistake in motive constitutes an error in the important part of the content of a juristic act, it is sufficient to conclude that the motive is deemed as the content of the relevant expression of intent and that there is an agreement between the parties to separately consider the motive as the content of a juristic act in the interpretation of the expression of intent, and it is necessary to conclude that there is an agreement between the parties to separately consider the motive as the content of the juristic act. However, there is no need to conclude an agreement between the parties to separately make the motive as the content of the juristic act as the content of the expression

(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da26210 delivered on September 30, 1997, and Supreme Court Decision 2000Da12259 delivered on May 12, 200). In light of the above legal principles, the following circumstances are as follows: (a) in light of the above legal principles, the above basic facts and the records of evidence Nos. 1, 9, and 11 as to the instant case; (b) the entire purport of the pleadings, and (c) the following circumstances, namely, (a) the membership agreement of the instant case, facilitate the establishment of apartment buildings in the area-based housing association.

arrow