logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원고등법원 2020.11.19 2019나16884
손해배상
Text

Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revocation shall be dismissed.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the instant case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except when the court renders, adds, or deletes part of the instant case as set forth in the following paragraph (2). Therefore, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

2. The second 10-13 parts of the judgment of the court of first instance, which are used or added and deleted, shall be added and deleted as follows:

A. On October 28, 2015, the Defendant: (a) leased 200 square meters out of the instant land to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) on October 28, 2015 (hereinafter “the instant land”); (b) set the lease deposit amount of KRW 5 million, KRW 2 million, and the lease period of KRW 200,000 from October 28, 2015 to October 27, 2016; (c) leased the instant land to D’s representative director, the remainder of the instant land during the lease period of KRW 100,000,000,000,000 from the expiration of the lease period of KRW 20,000,000,000 to October 27, 2016 (hereinafter “the lease period of the instant land”); and (d) set the lease period of KRW 100,000,000,000,000 from the expiration of the lease period of the instant land to KRW 27.

The third and tenth parts of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be cut to the following:

f. The Defendant, around May 31, 2018, removed the instant public relations center and moved the collection equipment, such as electronic equipment inside the instant site (hereinafter “instant collection equipment”) to the container stuff and the Defendant’s establishment. “No. 11 of the third party of the judgment of the first instance” is “No. 22, No. 15, No. 18, and No. 23 of the judgment of the first instance.”

arrow