logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.01.15 2019나2019830
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act citing the judgment of the court of first instance

However, as follows, part of the appeal is dismissed, and the judgment on the plaintiff's assertion is supplemented.

2. 3-B of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which was accepted after the dismissal.

The main part of the judgment of the court of first instance (6 pages 13-20) shall be followed as follows:

Article 25(1) of the Private International Act provides that “If the parties have not selected the applicable law, the contract shall be governed by the law of the country most closely related to the contract.” Article 29(1) of the same Act provides that “if the contract is concluded and its validity is valid, the contract shall be determined in accordance with the applicable law to be applied under this Act.” The issue of this case is whether the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on title trust or the name lending was made in connection with the loan to E” (i.e., whether the Plaintiff lent the name of the defendant to E), and (ii) whether the Plaintiff is a representative of Japan at the time of lending to E, the Defendant was residing in Japan, and (iii) whether the agreement was made between the Plaintiff and the competent court on the loan to the Plaintiff is reasonable in view of the above provisions of the Private International Act.”

arrow