beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
The costs of appeal between the plaintiff and the defendant C shall be borne by each party.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
1. Plaintiff’s ground of appeal
A. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the lower court determined that the agreement of May 3, 2007 was concluded by the Defendant C on May 3, 2007, by sending to D a document certifying the content that Defendant C would terminate the agreement and collect documents on the termination of provisional seizure on the grounds of nonperformance of its duty after the agreement of May 3, 2007, and by delivering the passbook and seal of the Defendant C, the representative of D, who was delivered by Defendant C, was agreed upon.
Examining the record, the above determination by the court below is justifiable.
In doing so, there is no error of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules or misapprehending the legal principles on the termination of agreement.
The Supreme Court precedents cited in the grounds of appeal are different from cases and thus are inappropriate to be invoked in this case.
B. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, the lower court, citing the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance court, determined that Es. S.D. accepted only KRW 150 million with respect to the principal and interest on the loan to Defendant C by the agreement to assume debt of this case, and that the remaining apartment business amount equivalent to 50% of the acquisition amount of the apartment business of this case is not included in the subject of the above debt acquisition but still remains liable to D.
Examining the record, the above determination by the court below is justifiable.
There is no error of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or misapprehending the legal principles on the interpretation of the assumption agreement.
C. As to the third ground of appeal, the unfair legal act under Article 104 of the Civil Act is provided for benefit and benefit.