beta
Text
1. Following the amendment of the purport of the claim by this court, the judgment of the first instance is modified as follows.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, while revising the text of the judgment of the court of first instance.
1. Does
2. Since part of the entry is the same, it shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
The 10th page 2 of the first instance judgment “the Plaintiff shall revise the part from January 2, 2014 to 2th page 13 as follows:
[Plaintiff was withdrawn from the Defendant’s company on January 12, 2014. After that, the Defendant possessed the machinery listed in the attached list Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, and 11, and the Defendant arbitrarily sold the machinery listed in the attached list Nos. 2, 3, 7, and 10. The Defendant delivered the machinery listed in the attached list Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 9, and 11 to the Plaintiff as of January 12, 2014, and as of January 12, 2014, the Plaintiff is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages equivalent to KRW 32,00,000,000, which is the aggregate of the highest prices of the machinery listed in the attached list No. 2, 32,7, and 100, and damages for delay as follows. See the first instance judgment 2, 16 through 31, respectively.
[As seen earlier, the part of the Plaintiff’s claim for delivery is deemed to have been withdrawn. In full view of the Plaintiff’s claim for damages, this part of the Plaintiff’s claim is examined. In full view of the Plaintiff’s appraisal result, supplementary appraisal result, and the purport of the entire pleadings, etc., the used value of the machinery listed in paragraph (2) of the attached Table No. 2 as of January 12, 2014, which is the date of withdrawal of the Plaintiff’s claim for delivery, can be acknowledged the fact that the used value of the machinery listed in paragraph (3) of the attached Table No. 3 (the used value of the scrap metal, the used value of the machinery listed in paragraph (7) of the attached Table No. 7, and the used value of the machinery listed in paragraph (10) of the attached Table No. 9.5 million won.
In addition, as shown below, the machines listed in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the attached list shall be deemed to be owned by the plaintiff, as shown in the attached list 1, 4, and 5, as they were entered and used by the plaintiff when they enter C.