beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1. Purport of the claim.
Reasons
1. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are recognized as legitimate even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance contains the statements and images of the evidence No. 10 to 13 (including the number of serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) submitted in the court of first instance.
Therefore, the reasoning for this court's explanation is as follows: (a) No. 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance added the following contents to the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) except for the addition of the following '2. Additional Judgment' as to the argument that the defendant added or emphasized by the court of first instance, this court's reasoning is as follows; (c)
[Additional Provisions] The interpretation of a juristic act is clearly confirming the objective meaning that the parties have given to the act of expressing the juristic act. Although it is not subject to the phrase used in writing, the objective meaning that the parties have given to the act of expressing the act shall be reasonably interpreted according to the contents of the document regardless of the party's internal intent. In a case where the objective meaning is not clearly expressed by the party's language, the contents of the text, the motive and circumstance leading up to the juristic act, the purpose and genuine intent of the parties to the juristic act, transaction practices, etc. shall be reasonably interpreted in accordance with logical and empirical rules, the common sense of society, and the transaction norms so as to be in accordance with the ideology of social justice and equity. Such a legal principle shall be applied likewise to a case where there is dispute as to the interpretation of the adjustment clause after the parties to the lawsuit constituted mediation
(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da31550 Decided September 10, 2009). 2. Additional determination
A. Summary of the Defendant’s assertion 1, the Plaintiff raised objection.