(영문) 광주고등법원(전주) 2015.10.22 2014나3226

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) 광주고등법원(전주) 2015.10.22 2014나3226

청구이의

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 reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the part of the judgment of the court of first instance is used or amended as follows. Thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary or revised parts] Part 7 of the first instance judgment "54,51,945 won" shall be added to "54,541,945 won".

Part 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter “parties 5,00,000 won”). Part 9, Part 12 to 16 of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter “the key issue of this case”) shall be deleted. Part 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter “the 10,000 won”) shall be “7,50,000 won.” Part 10,000 won of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be “7,30,000 won.” Part 15, 15, and 21 of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter “1,516,510,00 won for the construction work of this case”) shall be written. Part 1,579,379,230 won for the construction work of this case shall be written at the time of the modification of the contract for the construction work of this case, and each of them shall be paid at the time of the modification of the construction work of this case or the construction work of Eup.

In addition, the amount calculated according to the above is deemed to have no big difference from the Defendant’s loan claims against the Plaintiff indicated on the instant notarial deed. 7 The Defendant did not specify the terms of the agreement, such as interest and repayment, or submit objective documents, such as a loan certificate, even though he asserted that he lent a total of KRW 357,482,250 to the Plaintiff several times. Among them, KRW 357,482,250, the Defendant’s loan, which the Defendant asserts, was transferred over three times to the Plaintiff and lent KRW 140,00,000, and the loan necessary for the Plaintiff to purchase each land owned by E and F, KRW 50,000.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-대전고등법원(청주) 2017.05.30 2016나12138

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.02.10 2016나55560

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.19 2017나25504

-대전고등법원 (청주) 2018.05.30 2018나2067

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.10 2017나93