(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.01.18 2018나2029687

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) 서울고등법원 2019.01.18 2018나2029687

증권

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance shows each letter submitted to the court of first instance, and the result of each examination of T and AG conducted in this court, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justified.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of some of the contents as set forth in the following paragraph (2). Therefore, it is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of

2. The expression “witness” in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as “witness”, “this court” as “witness of the court of first instance,” and “this court” as “the court of first instance,” respectively.

The third 13 to 14 of the judgment of the first instance court "the result of the C's inquiry reply to the fact-finding" shall be added to "the result of the inquiry reply to the fact-finding by the first instance court C".

Part 18 to 5 of the text of the judgment of the court of first instance stating that “(the part that “AG had the existence of an oral agreement from S” among the statements made by evidence A27 does not believe in light of the aforementioned various circumstances)” is “(the part that “AG had the existence of an oral agreement from S” among the statements made by evidence A27, or the part that “AG’s testimony from this court does not coincide with the aforementioned various circumstances and the statements made by the S,” in light of the fact that the content of AG’s testimony in this purport is inconsistent with the aforementioned various circumstances and the statements made by the S.

(i)be engaged in 10.0

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2017.05.19 2016나2057909

-서울고등법원 2018.11.16 2018나2000150

-대전고등법원(청주) 2020.05.19 2019나3210

-서울고등법원 2017.09.01 2017나2005448

-서울고등법원 2015.01.15 2014나2027652