logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.08.24 2018나23966
전부금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the reasoning of the judgment, is as follows, and this case is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, on the grounds that the court of first instance excluded the Plaintiff’s assertion to revise and add a new addition or emphasize in this court.

In the part revised, the second two pages of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: “Plaintiffs” is as “Plaintiffs (the trade name at the time was a Algerz life insurance company)”; “The foregoing part is added in full view of the respective entries and arguments in the evidence Nos. 2 and 3 (including the paper numbers) and the whole purport of the pleadings.”

In the second and fifth facts of the first instance judgment, “the foregoing case” (hereinafter referred to as “the first instance judgment”) shall be added to “the first instance judgment” and “the final judgment”.

2. Additional determination

A. Part 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance related to a judgment without pleading) The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff did not submit a written answer to the lapse of at least one month even after receiving a duplicate of the complaint of this case. On March 15, 2018, the Plaintiff’s written amendment stated the title of the document as “an amendment to the amendment order”. The Plaintiff was served with the delivery of the document, but did not answer each of the Plaintiff’s arguments by item.

In addition, the defendant's written reply dated March 9, 2018 does not have any indication that the court received it and the defendant's signature and seal, so it cannot be deemed that the defendant's written reply was lawfully submitted.

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance should have been rendered in favor of the plaintiff on the ground that the defendant failed to submit the written reply, but it is unlawful to render the judgment of the plaintiff's failure on the ground that the same prior judgment

B) Articles 257(1) and 256(1) and 256(1) of the Civil Procedure Act to be submitted. (1) Where the Defendant contests the Plaintiff’s claim, he/she shall submit a written answer within 30 days from the date of receipt of a duplicate of the complaint

However, the defendant has a copy of the complaint by means of service by publication.

arrow