logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.11.08 2017나4568
자재임대료 등
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 parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion did not receive KRW 295,200 from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) even though the Plaintiff leased the materials, such as water pumps, etc. (hereinafter “instant materials”) from the Defendant at the construction site of the Gyeongbuk-gun, Gyeongbuk-gun (hereinafter “instant materials”).

In addition, the Defendant lost the materials of KRW 393,00 among the materials of this case.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the amount of damages equivalent to the rent and the amount of the lost material cost.

B. The party who leased the instant materials from the Plaintiff’s assertion is the United Nations for the Eastern Industry (hereinafter “Dongdong Industry”), and it merely acts as an employee of the Eastern Industry as an agent for concluding a contract. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case cannot be complied with.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 of a party to a lease agreement of this case constitutes a matter of interpretation of the intent of the party involved in the contract. Interpretation of an expression of intent constitutes a matter of interpretation of the party involved in the contract. The objective meaning that the party involved in the contract clearly establishes the objective meaning that the party gave to the expression of intent is clearly determined, and where the content of a contract is written in writing, which is a disposal document, it shall be reasonably interpreted according to the content of the written document, regardless of the party’s inner intent, although it is not attached to the expression used in writing. In such cases, unless there are special circumstances, unless the objective meaning of the text is clear, the existence and content of the expression of intent should be acknowledged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da4471, Nov. 29, 2012). 2) The following facts or circumstances, namely, Gap 1, 2, and 3 (including serial numbers) and the entire purport of oral proceedings, which are acknowledged as follows:

arrow