logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.08.21 2019나2058422
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

1...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant’s situation is a public-service corporation established for the purpose of contributing to national and social development by conducting scholarship projects for I pursuant to the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Public-Service Corporations (hereinafter “Public-Service Corporations Act”). Before 1997, the Defendant was ordered to compensate the damages from the head of the District Education Office of Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education (hereinafter “Seo-gu Office of Education”) (hereinafter “Seo-gu Office of Education”), which is the supervisory authority, to normalize the operation of the Foundation.

B. Permission to dispose of the Defendant’s fundamental property 1) Defendant’s chief director, J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “J”).

B) On April 4, 1997, K, which had a co-representative, omitted the entry of the real estate “sale real estate” column as indicated below, which is the Defendant’s fundamental property, between L and H, as indicated in the Defendant’s “sale real estate” column, as indicated below. The real estate indicated in the real estate indication, up to the “Yansan-si Mdong” column, and hereinafter “sale real estate parcel

Some of the seven parcels of the instant real estate sold in this case were later divided as indicated in the column of real estate after the division.

There is a description of the preceding lawsuit on the eight pages of the same Table among the real estate after division. The term “real estate specified in paragraphs (1) through (17)” refers to each real estate of this case.

) After purchasing the same and making an agreement to build a golf range, etc. on the ground, LJ’s joint representative director, and after dividing the assessed amount of real estate sold each time, there was an explanation as to the relevant lawsuit on the 7th page of the judgment in this case related to the instant lawsuit involving the No. 1 N. 1 N. 1 N. 45,495,000 square meters of 55,041 square meters of 605,451,000 related litigation (P 33, Q. 31,736 square meters of Q. 291,971,20 Q. 200 square meters of 950 square meters of Q. 31,736 m294 m284 m284 m284 m284 m284 m2,576 m21, 721 m27 m27.

arrow