(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.01.25 2017나2072905

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 2019.01.25 2017나2072905

건물명도(인도)

Text

1. Of the part relating to the claim for payment of the money in the judgment of the court of first instance, the following amounts shall be exceeded:

Reasons

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

A. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning the instant case is next to the judgment of the first instance.

The decision of the court of first instance is the same as that of the decision of the court of first instance, except for the modification as stated in paragraph 2 and the addition of the decision in the next trial as stated in paragraph 2.

B. Part 1) The second end of the judgment of the court of first instance is that “a lease contract was concluded and the non-party company received KRW 85 million from the non-party company.” 2) The third end of the judgment of the court of first instance is “monthly rent” and the second end of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: “The 28th day of each month.”

The third notification of repair was made in the subsection of the same paragraph, and the "(the location of the place of business under the registration certificate is the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 1)" was added respectively, and the fourth "previous" in the same paragraph is the same side as "Ba".

From the end of each of the “instant cases” and the end of each of the fourths, the “instant case” and the “instant case” of the first and the sixths each of the “instant case” are considered to be the “court” respectively.

3) The following parts are added to the 3rd d. of the first d. of the judgment, the second d. of the third d. of the first d. of the judgment. [However, although the Plaintiff has made a statement to the effect that a part of the Plaintiff was delivered by enforcing a provisional execution based on the judgment of the provisional execution sentence of the first d. of the first d. of the first d. of the judgment, the validity of the claim should be determined without considering the result of execution when determining the merits in the appellate court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da3572, Sept. 8, 201) without considering the result of execution (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da35722, Sept. 8, 201). The 3rd d. of the first d. of the first d. of the first d. of the judgment, adding “(including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply)” to “the evidence evidence No. 8 and evidence No. 9” of the same.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

참조판례

-대법원 2011. 9. 8. 선고 2011다35722 판결

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2019.01.11 2018나2035378

-서울고등법원 2018.05.18 2017나2053478

-서울고등법원 2019.04.12 2018나2051646

-서울고등법원 2017.12.08 2017나2035234

-서울고등법원 2018.12.07 2018나2046958