logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.03.10 2016나2043290
변호사보수금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The reasons for citing the judgment of the first instance are as follows: ① A evidence No. 3 is added to the "No. 3" of Part 5, Part 14, and ② is as stated in the reasons for the judgment of the first instance, except for adding the "No. 8" to the "No. 6, as shown below," so the delegation contract of the first instance is accepted as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, even if there was a delegation contract of the first instance court, the plaintiff cannot be deemed to have a right to contingent remuneration under the delegation contract of the first instance court, even if there was a delegation contract of the first instance court, and the "No. 2" was written as the "No. 0, the plaintiff's contingent remuneration contract of the first instance court," which was written as 00, the "No. 100, the plaintiff's contingent remuneration contract of the first instance court," which was written as the "No. 20,000,00 for the plaintiff's contingent remuneration contract of this case."

arrow