(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.09.08 2019나2047361

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 2020.09.08 2019나2047361

보증금반환

Text

1. Defendant B’s appeal is dismissed.

2. The defendant B shall bear the total costs of the lawsuit after filing the appeal.

purport.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, and they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, given that the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court

2. Parts used or added;

A. 1-B of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance.

The paragraphs are as follows:

“B.” As to H on September 25, 2013, which was represented by the Plaintiff as the agent of Defendant C, Defendant C, the former lessee, Plaintiff 400,000,000, and the sub-lease period from December 31, 2013 to December 31, 2015 (hereinafter “sub-lease contract of this case”).

On December 27, 2013, the Korea Land and Housing Corporation (Korea Land and Housing Corporation) agreed to the instant sub-lease contract. The Plaintiff was living in the instant real estate in accordance with the instant sub-lease contract and retired on February 17, 2017.

B. Each of the fifth five statements in the judgment of the court of first instance is stated as "each of the fifth five statements", and the testimony of H by a witness of this court is deemed as "roat and six parallels".

The following shall be deemed difficult to believe that each of the evidence Nos. 43, 46, and 47, which are contrary to the foregoing ", is recorded, and the remaining evidence submitted by the defendant B shall not interfere with the foregoing recognition.

"in addition".

C. The following parts are added between the 8th and 15th of the judgment of the first instance.

7. The witness H of this Court testified for the following purposes, and H’s testimony may be trusted in light of the attitude, content, etc. of the testimony.

According to this, even if Defendant C was named as a sub-lease at the time of the conclusion of the sub-lease contract of this case, it is reasonable to deem that Defendant B was the party to sub-lease the real estate of this case to the Plaintiff, even if Defendant B was named as the agent of Defendant C, it is reasonable to deem that there was an agreement between Defendant B and H.

The witness is in the relationship with the plaintiff I.

Plaintiff .

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2016.07.20 2015나2050918

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.23 2016나26241

-서울고등법원 2019.09.06 2019누40330

-서울고등법원 2020.01.08 2019나2027305

-서울고등법원 2019.11.14 2019나2013078