(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.09.09 2013나12863

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.09.09 2013나12863

보증채무금

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is a company aimed at publishing a daily newspaper (hereinafter "the defendant company").

B. B from October 200 to December 6, 2012, as a reporter at the branch office of the Defendant Company’s C, substantially operated the branch office in the name of D, and from October 2004, the Defendant Company E was working from October 2004. The Plaintiff is a reporter at the Defendant Company’s C branch office from October 25, 2004 to February 6, 2012.

[Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 15, Eul evidence Nos. 14 and 15 (including identification numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion on the ground of claim

A. The primary assertion is that the Plaintiff actually operated the C branch office in the name of F or G while working as the C branch office of the Defendant Company, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 15 million to the Defendant Company, on behalf of the Defendant Company, the management deposit amount of the C branch office that the former C branch office B should be returned from the Defendant Company, thereby paying KRW 15 million to the Defendant Company as the management deposit amount.

However, since the Plaintiff retired from the Defendant Company on January 16, 2012, the Defendant is obligated to refund KRW 15 million paid by the Plaintiff.

B. Preliminary assertion B, from October 200, worked as the reporter at the branch office and the C branch office, paid KRW 15 million to the Defendant Company, and resigned from the office of C branch office upon the Defendant Company’s issuance to E on October 2004. If the Plaintiff’s management deposit is not recognized, the Defendant Company did not refund KRW 15 million to B.

However, as the Defendant Company transferred its operating deposit to the Plaintiff and notified the Defendant Company of the fact of transfer, the Defendant Company is obligated to refund KRW 15 million to the Plaintiff, the transferee of the claim.

3. Determination

A. Judgment on the primary cause of the claim B

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2016.06.30 2016노1534

-부산지방법원 2016.07.14 2015나15754

-부산지방법원 2015.10.20 2012가단87573

-대구지방법원김천지원 2015.11.26 2014가단648

-부산고등법원 2019.07.25 2018나53675