logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.05.13 2019나2044904
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and each of the evidence submitted in the court of first instance is deemed legitimate even if each of the evidence submitted in the court of first instance was presented to this court.

Therefore, the court's explanation on the instant case is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the partial modification or deletion as follows, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The two pages 15, 21, 3 and 14 of the judgment of the first instance court are all referred to as "this court".

Part 6 through 9 of the judgment of the first instance shall be deleted.

제1심 판결문 제6면 제10행의 “⑻”을 “⑺”로 고친다.

On the 9th judgment of the first instance court, the term "this law" in the 21st judgment shall be read as "court of the first instance".

In the 11th judgment of the first instance court, the "fact that the statement was made" in the 10th judgment is as follows.

A witness makes a statement, and "I wish to kill......... the witness sent to C various intimidations, such as "I want to kill............ I will not accurately associate with the question of the counsel of C's lawyer, "I want to die......., we want to do so, I want to do so, and you want to do so, I would like to do so, I would like to say, "I would like to see................., I would like to say that I would like to do so.........., I would not agree with the first instance court's decision".

Part 11 of the judgment of the first instance court, "(in particular, on June 29, 2015, C made two times a statement of payment of KRW 500 million and KRW 600 million to the defendant)" in part 18 and 19 of the judgment of the first instance.

arrow