(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.07.11 2019나2007011

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.07.11 2019나2007011

징계결의무효확인 청구의 소

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 for the court's explanation on this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: "AC" shall be deemed to be "AC"; "The decision of September 27, 1985, which was submitted as favorable evidence to AC (hereinafter "the decision of this case")" shall be deemed to be "the land registered as the ownership of the defendant clan, was sold to AC, and a clan shall be admitted as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the addition as follows:

2. Additional Judgment

A. According to the regulatory system, it is reasonable to view that the board of directors makes decisions on the punishment for the punishment for the defendant's clan 1) Article 29 of Chapter 7 of the defendant's clan provides that "the head office may deliberate on and commend the relatives who have done the same preceding action as that of the head office" and Article 30 of the same Chapter provides that "a person who has committed the same act as that of the head office shall be subject to disclosure at the government or the representative meeting of the representative National Assembly" and Article 30 of the same Chapter provides that "a person who has done the same act as that of the head office in the head office shall be subject to disclosure at the council or the representative meeting of the representative National Assembly" but Article 30 does not specify the subject separately from the award and punishment subject, it is reasonable to view that the board of directors makes decisions on the punishment for the punishment for a certain period of time, rather than the subject of the award and punishment, it is reasonable in the system of the provision. 2) The commendation of Article 29 of the clan does not affect the rights and obligations of the members, while Article 30 of the clan may deprive the opportunity to participate for a certain.

Therefore, the discipline is different from the specification of the subject of the commendation to the board of directors.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-대전지방법원논산지원 2015.04.30 2014가단2641

-광주고법 2001. 6. 28. 선고 99노900 판결：상고기각

-서울고등법원 2005.12.22. 선고 2005나64707 판결

-서울고법 1977. 4. 28. 선고 76나2556 제6민사부판결 : 상고

-수원지법 2009. 10. 8. 선고 2008가합19235 판결