logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2017.03.31 2016나16434
배당이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows. The plaintiff's new argument at the trial of the court of first instance is added with the part concerning the defendants in the judgment of the court of first instance as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for adding the judgment of the court of first instance as to the new argument at the trial of the court of first instance as stated in paragraph (2).

The defendant E shall be "E" in the second page 8, 15, 19, 3, 8, 13, 18, 4, 2, 6, 11, 16, 21, and 5 of the judgment of the first instance court.

Part 3 of the judgment of the first instance court, " August 13, 2012" in Part 16 of the judgment of the third instance shall be " October 31, 2010".

Part 4 of the judgment of the first instance court is " October 31, 2010" in Part 9 as " August 13, 2012."

Part 5 of the judgment of the first instance court, the "this Court" in Part 7 shall be deemed to be the "Support of the Daejeon District Court's Incheon District Court".

2. Additional determination

A. 1) The Plaintiff asserts that, even if the Plaintiff is liable for the return of the lease deposit against the Defendants, the Defendants are negligent in not verifying the existence of the right of representation under Article 396 of the Civil Act, so that the Plaintiff ought to limit the Plaintiff’s liability according to the reasoning of the principle of offsetting of negligence or liability for negligence under Article 396 of the Civil Act. 2) The offsetting of negligence is recognized as a tort liability for nonperformance or tort (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da34143, Mar. 13, 2014). As seen in the instant case, this does not apply to cases where the Plaintiff seeks the return of the lease deposit based on the lease contract

In addition, it is allowed to limit the content of the contractual rights to the contract, based on the principle of good faith or fairness, and the principle of liability for negligence, on the ground that there is some negligence in the process of concluding the contract in case of seeking performance according to the contractual terms.

arrow