(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.12.12 2019나2009314

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) 서울고등법원 2019.12.12 2019나2009314

위약금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as follows, with a exception to cutting or deleting some contents as follows:

(The main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act). Two of the three pages below the judgment of the court of first instance shall be referred to as "the witness of the court of first instance".

The three to nine parts of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows. "The defendant is either from one another."

The defendant shall be obliged to pay to the plaintiff a penalty of KRW 200 million in accordance with Article 5 of the above agreement. The defendant shall be punished by "the defendant shall be liable to pay a penalty of KRW 800 million on the following day" in the fourth 8th of the judgment of the first instance.

The 5th half and 6th half of the first instance judgment "no evidence shall be admitted" shall be raised as follows:

There is no objective evidence to be recognized (However, according to the evidence No. 19 and No. 1 of the evidence No. 1, according to the plaintiff's written statement of the evidence No. 19 and No. 1, it is recognized that the plaintiff sent a written answer to the defendant that "the plaintiff is responsible for compensating the plaintiff because he/she had cancelled the provisional injunction against disposal of the main apartment newly constructed in the name of E and prevented him/her from receiving the money from E by cancelling the provisional injunction against disposal of the main apartment." The plaintiff sent a written answer to the defendant around June 8, 2015 and sent "the plaintiff pays the money equivalent to 1/2 of the expenses paid by the defendant." However, it was prepared to respond to the defendant's demand for compensation, and it is not clear that the above written reply itself has no evidence to acknowledge that there is no evidence to acknowledge the expenses from the plaintiff's request for the payment of the penalty or the original written agreement from the defendant.

) The part of the first instance judgment’s 5th Hair Hair 3 to Hair 1st Hair Hair is deleted.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2019.08.13 2018나2066761

-서울고등법원 2020.02.06 2019나2017230

-서울고등법원 2019.10.24 2018나2054249

-서울고등법원 2018.09.20 2017나2075898