(영문) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2018.11.13 2018나333

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) 춘천지방법원 강릉지원 2018.11.13 2018나333

투자금

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. According to the records of this case, the first instance court rendered a judgment citing the Plaintiff’s claim on January 26, 2018 after serving a copy of the complaint, notification of the date of pleading, etc. to the Defendant by public notice, and subsequently served the original copy of the judgment on January 30, 2018 on the Defendant by public notice.

On April 12, 2018, the Defendant became aware that the first instance judgment was served by public notice, and filed the instant appeal on April 23, 2018.

Therefore, since the defendant could not comply with the appeal period, which is the peremptory period, due to a cause not attributable to him, the appeal of this case filed within two weeks from the date on which the court of first instance became aware of the fact by public notice is lawful.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff and the defendant agreed to operate the Arts Experience Center at around May 2009. After December 8, 2010, the defendant prepared a letter stating that "the plaintiff shall pay 12 million won to the plaintiff by July 1, 201 (hereinafter referred to as "each letter of this case") to the plaintiff on December 8, 201," and that "the plaintiff and the defendant certified that the notary public of this case as law firm rate 1894 as to each letter of this case by the law firm rate 2010."

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay 12 million won and damages for delay to the plaintiff according to the letter of this case.

B. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant asserted that the written statement of this case was prepared by coercion or intimidation of the Plaintiff, but the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to recognize the above assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

In addition, the defendant does not receive the investment money from the plaintiff.

유사 판례

-부산고등법원 (창원) 2018.12.13 2018나155

-제주지방법원 2018.05.30 2016나1397

-대구지방법원 2019.05.15 2018나319885

-서울남부지방법원 2020.08.27 2019나57075

-창원지방법원 2019.01.11 2017나6379