(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2020.04.09 2019나36187

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) 서울북부지방법원 2020.04.09 2019나36187

부당이득금반환

Text

1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the instant principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.

2. The appeal costs.

Reasons

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of the facts and the parties’ assertion is as follows, and this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary part] The fifth to fifth to seventh parts of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be added as follows.

“As seen earlier, the Plaintiff was released from the sales of this case by refusing to perform its obligation (payment obligation) due to the sale of this case, as well as the default of obligation as seen earlier, and thus, the Plaintiffs are liable to compensate the Defendant for damages arising therefrom. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s principal claim shall be dismissed. Accordingly, according to the Defendant’s counterclaim, the Plaintiffs shall pay KRW 61,772,480 remaining after deducting KRW 10,000 paid from the down payment, which is the estimated amount of compensation for damages, from the down payment.”

2. Determination

A. (1) The judgment on the cause of the claim in this case and ① the invalid provision in this case are terms and conditions, and as to the part for which the meaning of the invalid provision in the special agreement in this case is unclear under Article 5 of the Regulation of Terms and Conditions Act (hereinafter “Standard Terms and Conditions Regulation Act”), the invalid provision in this case must be interpreted favorably to the plaintiffs who are customers, and ② the invalid provision in the special agreement in this case clearly states that "the contract in this case shall be null and void unless the contract amount is fully paid," and the meaning of the invalid provision in this case shall be interpreted as "the contract in this case shall be null and void." The meaning of the invalid provision in this case shall be interpreted as "the sale in this case automatically null and void by August 24, 2018 if part of the contract deposit in this case is unpaid by the time of August 24, 2018."

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

-약관의 규제에 관한 법률 제5조

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2021.02.05 2020나59961

-대전고등법원 2019.03.20 2018누12624

-부산지방법원 2020.04.02 2019나53242

-서울고등법원 2018.01.11 2017나2025626

-부산고등법원 2017.07.19 2016나57383