(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.04.01 2019재나50059

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) 광주지방법원 2020.04.01 2019재나50059

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the defendant;

purport, purport, ..

Reasons

1. The following facts are apparent in the records of the judgment subject to a retrial:

On January 13, 2017, the Deceased filed a lawsuit against the Defendant and C for delivery of the name of the building (delivery) as the Gwangju District Court’s 2017da70240, and the said court rendered a judgment that accepted the deceased’s claim for delivery and withdrawal and dismissed his/her claim for overdue rent (hereinafter “the first judgment”) on April 12, 2018.

B. Accordingly, the Deceased, the Defendant, and C appealed as the Gwangju District Court 2018Na5417. On May 11, 2018, the Defendant filed a counterclaim, such as the written claim for the counterclaim, with the same court (2018Na54667). On February 15, 2019, the said court accepted the Defendant’s simultaneous performance defense, modified the first instance judgment regarding the claim of the Deceased, accepted the claim for eviction, accepted the request for extradition, partly accepted the request for extradition, dismissed the claim for arrears, and dismissed the Defendant’s claim for counterclaim, and rendered a judgment citing part of the Defendant’s claim for counterclaim (hereinafter “instant judgment”).

C. Accordingly, the Deceased and the Defendant appealed as Supreme Court Decision 2019Da219762 (principal suit), 2019Da21979 (Counterclaim), but the said court rendered a judgment that all appeals by the Deceased and the Defendant were dismissed on June 27, 2019, and the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive as it is.

After that, the Deceased died on October 30, 2019, the Plaintiff (Appointed Party, Defendant for Review) and the designated parties, who are his/her spouse, jointly inherited the deceased’s property.

2. Grounds for retrial and determination

A. The Defendant asserts to the following purport, and the Defendant specified Article 451(1)5 and 6 of the Civil Procedure Act as grounds for retrial.

The Plaintiff, in a case that was accused of the crime of fraud, led to the confession that the lease contract used as evidence in the judgment subject to a retrial was fake.

Therefore, the judgment subject to a retrial is a means of attack and defense that leads to confession, or impact on the judgment, due to the act of a person who is punished.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제451조 제1항

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2015.02.04 2014재나80

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.29 2016재나25

-청주지방법원 2016.10.21 2014재나92

-청주지방법원 2014.11.13 2014재나30

-청주지방법원 2014.02.18 2013재나33