logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.07.12 2016나110244
손해배상(기)
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 first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following modifications. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Forms 4, 12, and 17 of the judgment of the first instance shall be written in the following manner:

In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 19, 26 and Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3, Hdong residents may establish a funeral hall within the D convalescent Hospital as the plaintiff started construction with the permission for the construction of the D convalescent hospital from around 2013, and file a civil petition with the relevant agency. The plaintiff directly promised to Hdong residents that there is no plan for the installation of a funeral home within the D convalescent hospital around March 18, 2014, the plaintiff did not establish a funeral home at the time of the first opening of the said hospital; the plaintiff did not establish the funeral home at the time of the first opening of the hospital; the defendant started to operate the funeral home from January 2016; and the fact that the plaintiff was not aware of the plan for the establishment of the funeral home to the said hospital at the time of the agreement in this case; the defendant added the following contents to the second sentence of the first instance judgment of the court of first instance as follows:

The following is added to the judgment of the first instance court No. 6 of "No. 4 of the first instance court is deemed to have been known to the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff would have been expected to install and operate a funeral hall in the hospital, in particular, around March 18, 2014, at the time of the agreement of this case, the Plaintiff directly promised to the H residents that there is no plan to establish a funeral hall in the hospital. In fact, at the time of the agreement of this case, the foregoing hospital was not established, and the Defendant’s side appears to have not known that the Plaintiff would have been expected

In addition, the plaintiff, as a party to the agreement of this case, held that the defendant is liable for civil and criminal liability if the provisions of the agreement of this case are not fulfilled. This is the defendant's obligation of the council of occupants' representatives.

arrow