(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.07.18 2018나62537

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) 서울남부지방법원 2019.07.18 2018나62537

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The part of the conjunctive claim against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance against the defendant shall be revoked;

2. The foregoing.

Reasons

1. The first instance court dismissed the Defendant’s primary claim (a claim for damages arising from a tort) and partly accepted the conjunctive claim (the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment). The Defendant filed an appeal against this.

Therefore, the scope of a trial by the court of first instance, which partially accepted a conjunctive claim against the defendant, shall be limited to the propriety of the judgment of the court of first instance which partially accepted the conjunctive claim against the defendant, and the primary claim against the defendant shall be excluded from the subject of a trial by the court of first instance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Da31624, Feb. 10, 1995). 2. The reason why the court of first instance explains this part is identical to that of Paragraph 1 (No. 2, No. 17, and No. 5, No. 3 of the judgment) among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for

Part 2 of the judgment of the first instance court, "at the request of Defendant B and C," part 3, part 4, part 3, part 11, part 3, part 4, part 3, part 4, part 7, part 4, part 10 through 14, and part 4, part 10 through 14, are deleted.

Part 3 of the judgment of the first instance court, from the same page 3 to the same page 3, the written contract for a construction project that is contracted shall be prepared, and from the defendant in Part 8 to the "B" in Part 4 to the "B" in Part 9 of Part 4 to the "E in the same amount borrowed as the above."

Part 4 of the decision of the court of first instance shall be stated in the paragraph 19 of the decision of the court of first instance, and the "reported" shall be stated in the "reported," and the same paragraph shall be deleted from 20.

3. Judgment on the conjunctive claim

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is anticipated that E would repay the loans secured by the bill of this case. At the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant and the persons designated by the Defendant (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the Defendant”) money equivalent to the amount claimed.

However, since E did not repay the above loans, the defendant.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

참조판례

-대법원 1995. 2. 10. 선고 94다31624 판결

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.05.12 2016나76666

-부산고등법원 2020.05.21 2019나53610

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.08 2016나69118

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.12 2017나20479

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.05.12 2016나59807