(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.07 2018나21530

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.07 2018나21530

손해배상(기)

Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The reasoning for this part of this Court is as follows: “2. A. Fact of recognition” in the judgment of the first instance.

The same part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case of marization as stated in the same paragraph, is identical to the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article

(b) in the name of the co-defendant in the first instance trial part, “the Defendant” shall be deleted.

Part 4 of the judgment of the first instance court, "M" in Part 5 is dismissed as "T", and part 10 "the highest amount of the highest amount of the bonds" shall be raised as "the highest amount of bonds".

Part 5 of the first instance judgment, "L division" in Part 2 shall be deemed "L division".

From the 6th judgment of the first instance court, the first instance court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on February 17, 2016.

On March 31, 2017, after the above judgment became final and conclusive, the registration of the establishment of the instant neighboring mortgage was cancelled.

"Ero-friendly".

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Article 25 of the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act provides that when a certified judicial scrivener has been delegated a case, he/she shall either submit or present a certificate prepared pursuant to the law, such as a certificate of seal imprint, etc., or verify that the mandator is the principal or his/her agent, and the method, contents, etc. of confirmation shall be entered in the case register. Defendant H is obligated to verify that the applicant for registration of the establishment of the establishment of the establishment of the relocation of this case is the principal or his/her agent pursuant to Article 25 of the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act. However, even according to the Defendants’ assertion, Defendant I, which is the cause of the business of Defendant H, applied for registration of the establishment of the relocation of this case without confirming his/her intention, who is the person responsible for registration and the delegating, is negligent in violating his/her duty of care. 2) As to this, Defendants

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

-법무사법 제25조

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2021.04.01 2020나2030499

-수원지방법원 2016.09.21 2015나37983

-대법원 2000. 7. 28. 선고 99다63107 판결

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.16 2014나15346

-대전고등법원 2018.01.11 2017나12644