logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2018.05.25 2017나39096
사용료
Text

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

2. The costs of appeal shall be the principal lawsuit.

Reasons

1. The reasons for this court’s acceptance of the judgment of the first instance are as follows, except where the defendant added or added the following “2. Additional Judgment” as to the assertion that the defendant added to this court, and where the defendant added or added it as “3. Any supplementary part,” the grounds for the judgment of the first instance are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the first instance, and thus, they are cited pursuant to the main sentence of

2. Additional determination

A. Although the Defendant’s assertion E concluded the instant loan agreement with the Defendant beyond the scope of the right of representation delegated from gender development, the Defendant believed that E had the authority to conclude the instant loan for use, and there exist justifiable grounds to believe such agreement, so the instant loan for use is also effective for gender development in accordance with Article 126 of the Civil Act, and the Defendant occupied the warehouse by legitimate source of possession.

B. Even based on all evidence submitted by the Defendant, it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant has justifiable grounds for believing that he/she has the authority to conclude the instant loan for use to E, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Rather, in full view of the following circumstances, E is merely an employee of I who entered into a cleaning service contract with C, and the warehouse of this case does not allow a third party to use the common area of an aggregate building without compensation, it is difficult to deem that there is a justifiable reason for the Defendant to believe that E has the authority to enter into the loan agreement of this case.

3. The portion of theO No. 2, the part of which is changed or added, is "Ssung Development Co., Ltd." to "Ssung Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Ssung Development").

O The second part of the 17th page “Post-C” is regarded as “C (hereinafter “C”) on February 14, 2014.”

O.

arrow