logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.06.29 2017나2067996
채권조사확정재판에 대한 이의의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

A. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning the instant case is next to the judgment of the first instance.

The decision of the court of first instance is the same as that of the decision of the court of first instance, except for the revision as stated in the following paragraph and addition of the decision in the trial as stated in paragraph (2).

B. 1) The amendment portion 1) The third part of the judgment of the court of first instance, “as of December 26, 2005,” and “as of April 12, 2006, with the fixed date obtained from April 12, 2006,” respectively, are deleted from the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and “as of April 7, 2006,” the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance includes “as of April 3, 2006, each number includes each number included; hereinafter, the same includes any number except where the number is indicated otherwise).”

3) On December 26, 2005, the first instance court’s decision No. 4, 18, “as seen in the above,” and “written” of the said act No. 19, respectively, and deleted the same act with the fixed date fixed as of April 12, 2006. 4) The court below’s decision No. 5 of the first instance court’s first instance court’s decision No. 5 of the first instance court’s No. 16 of the same act were “I feel pressure with the knowledge that the period has elapsed,” and each of the “the first instance court” of the same end was “the instant case.”

2. Additional determination is not sufficient to deem that the Plaintiff incurred losses due to the Plaintiff’s repayment of the instant loan with the instant D loan and the Plaintiff’s continued ground for appeal that is contrary thereto, on the grounds that there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise, the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the ground for appeal purporting to the effect that the Plaintiff’s continued ground for appeal that is contrary thereto cannot be accepted.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow