logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.01.30 2012나78643
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The part regarding the plaintiffs of the judgment of the first instance, including the claims extended and reduced in the trial, is as follows:

Reasons

Basic Facts

The reason why this Court is used in relation to this part is as follows, since the part of “1. Basic Facts” among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of “1. Basic Facts”, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

On September 1, 2014 after the division of the company, the Korea Exchange Bank established the Korea Exchange Card Co., Ltd. on September 1, 2014, and transferred all rights and duties relating to credit card business sector to the Korea Exchange Card Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea Exchange Bank”) in the 15 and 16th judgment of the first instance court. The Korea Exchange Card Co., Ltd. changed its trade name to “one Card Co.,, Ltd.” (hereinafter “Korea Exchange Bank”) while absorbing the bit Card Co., Ltd. on December 1, 2014.

Each "foreign exchange bank" in the 6th sentence, 17th sentence, 5th sentence, 14th sentence, 15th sentence, and 16th sentence shall be the "former foreign exchange bank" respectively.

With respect to the occurrence of liability for damages, this Court has the same reasons as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for the dismissal or addition of the pertinent parts as follows: (i) the occurrence of liability for damages (Articles 18, 2, 39, and 15, of the first instance judgment). Therefore, this Court shall accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

"(4), (4), and (5) of the judgment of the first instance court in the part of 29 pages shall be "(4), (4), and (5)."

Part 31 of the judgment of the first instance court, "applicable" is added to "(at least the evidence submitted by Defendant VN companies, such as evidence Nos. 19, 20, and A No. 21-1 through 3, are insufficient to reverse the above recognition)."

Part 33 of the judgment of the first instance court, "B" was submitted by the above Defendants, including the following: "B" 1, 2, 3, 15-1 through 18-A, 22-1 through 23-6, and 25-1 through 5, respectively.

arrow