본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
서울고등법원 2011.11.17 2011재나740

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, ..


1. Following the confirmation of the judgment subject to a retrial is significant in this court, or there is no dispute between the parties.

On January 1, 1993, the Plaintiff leased and resided part of the Defendant’s house owned by C, the father of the Defendant. However, on January 21, 1993, a fire occurred in the above house, and the goods owned by the Plaintiff were partly destroyed.

B. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C to seek payment of KRW 10 million with compensation, alleging that the Plaintiff sustained damages due to the said fire as the 97 Ghana District Court Decision 97 Ghana264.

On June 13, 1997, C paid to the Plaintiff KRW 500,000,000, and the mediation to waive the remaining claims was concluded.

C died in around 199 in 199, and the defendant is his children.

C. In Seoul Central District Court Decision 2005Da394114, which was the first instance court of the case that the plaintiff filed against the defendant for review, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant for compensation of damages amounting to 55 million won, alleging that the plaintiff suffered significant damages, such as clothes such as inn, meals, costs of lawsuit, excessive revenues, excessive compensation, liability for damages, books and teaching materials, and refineriess, such as clothing, bad faith, cosmetics, cosmetics, bedclothes, bedclothes, kitchens, kitchens, furnitures, furnitures, furnitures, congested products, congested products, and mental distress, etc. on May 3, 2006, the above court rejected the plaintiff's claim against the plaintiff on the ground that "the plaintiff had already filed a lawsuit against the defendant's father, who is the defendant's father, for conciliation due to the above fire, the damages due to the suspension of the operation of the lawsuit, the damages due to the suspension of the operation of the lawsuit, and there is no reason to acknowledge the plaintiff's remaining damages due to the suspension of operation."

As to this, the plaintiff.