본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
창원지방법원 2018.10.25 2017재가합47

손해배상(기)

Text

1. All of the appeals filed by the plaintiff (the plaintiff) against the defendant (the defendant) are dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be paid.

Reasons

1. On October 13, 2011, the Plaintiff, which became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to review, filed a lawsuit seeking compensation against the Defendants by the Changwon District Court 201Gahap2180 (hereinafter “case subject to review”), and was sentenced to a dismissal judgment (hereinafter “the judgment subject to review”), and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 18, 201.

[Reasons for Recognition] The substantial fact in this Court

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion ① Defendant B and Nonparty E, etc. were detained by the Plaintiff on June 15, 2012 by putting the charge against the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff was detained by law on August 18, 2012. On August 18, 2012, they deprived the Plaintiff of procedural fundamental rights, such as the Plaintiff’s right to pleadings, by searching for the original prison where the Plaintiff had been detained, and by threatening “the withdrawal of all civil litigation.”

This constitutes “when the submission of the method of offence or defense that may affect the judgment” under the latter part of Article 451(1)5 of the Civil Procedure Act.

② According to the relevant laws and regulations, in order to terminate a tangible or intangible financial product, a power of attorney must be attached to the application of the depositor himself/herself or his/her certificate of deposit.

In relation to the issue at issue in the case subject to review, “whether Defendant B had legitimate authority when cancelling the Plaintiff’s financial product under the name of the Plaintiff on behalf of the Plaintiff, and whether Defendant Jinhae Agricultural Cooperative, a financial institution, at the time, fulfilled its obligations under the relevant statutes and agreements, etc.” the Plaintiff’s claim was dismissed on the ground that there was insufficient evidence to acknowledge the voluntary withdrawal of Defendant B and the violation of its duty by Defendant Jinhae Agricultural Cooperative’s U.S., in the judgment subject to review, even though the Plaintiff did not have issued neither a power nor a certificate of seal impression at the time and did not have issued a certificate of seal impression.

This is the evidence of the judgment of Article 451, Paragraph 1, Item 6 of the Civil Procedure Act.