beta
Cases
2019Na39910 Action
Plaintiff-Appellant
A Stock Company
Law Firm Cho & Lee, Counsel for the defendant-appellant
Attorney Dog-gu et al.
Defendant Appellant
C
The first instance judgment
Seoul Central District Court Decision 2018Da52601 Decided May 30, 2019
Conclusion of Pleadings
December 11, 2019
Imposition of Judgment
January 15, 2020
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. Purport of claim
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 40,000,000 won with 5% interest per annum from the day following the day of serving a duplicate of the complaint of this case to the day of rendering a judgment of the court of first instance, and 15% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.
2. Purport of appeal
Among the judgment of the first instance, the part against the plaintiff shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revocation shall be dismissed.
Reasons
Inasmuch as 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, the Defendant cited it as it is pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Furthermore, in light of the language and form of Article 4 of the Agreement, and the intent of the parties inferred from the conclusion of arguments, Article 4 of the Agreement (Evidence A No. 2) concerning the determination of damages rather than penalty, and Article 4 of the Agreement (Evidence A) concerning the determination of penalty, and (2) the amount of penalty is excessive even if it is deemed a penalty, the agreement is null and void against the public order and good morals, or the amount of penalty should be reduced according to the analogical application of Article 398(2) of the Civil Act, the principle of equity or the principle of equity. In addition, it is reasonable to view that the above assertion is a method to defend the amount of penalty at a late time in light of the following: (a) it is reasonable to view the Defendant’s agreement as a penalty for breach of the principle of trust and good faith; (b).
Therefore, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.
Judges
Judge Park Il-young
Judges Sung-won
Judges Kim Jong-young