logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.09.08 2016가단207235
청구이의
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. With respect to the case of application for the suspension of compulsory execution, this Court on March 4, 2016, 5029

Reasons

1. The adjustment of the scope of judgment has the same effect as the final and conclusive judgment (Article 29 of the Judicial Conciliation of Civil Disputes Act, Article 220 of the Civil Procedure Act), and since a final and conclusive judgment has res judicata effect on the final and conclusive judgment, in a case where a party who has received a final and conclusive judgment files a lawsuit against the other party to the previous suit identical to that of the final and conclusive judgment

(1) According to the reasoning of the lower court’s judgment, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the res judicata effect of the instant lawsuit on July 15, 2015, and by misapprehending the legal principles as to the res judicata effect of the instant lawsuit, and by misapprehending the legal principles as to the res judicata effect of the instant lawsuit, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the res judicata effect of the instant lawsuit, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the res judicata effect of the instant lawsuit, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. In so doing, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the res judicata effect of the instant lawsuit, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, contrary to what is alleged in the ground of appeal.

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion demanded the Defendant to prepare for KRW 10 million as prescribed by the aforementioned conciliation and deliver documents, such as the withdrawal of auction and the withdrawal of security simultaneously with the payment of the above money, but the Defendant did not deliver documents, such as the withdrawal of auction and the revocation of security.

arrow