(영문) 수원고등법원 2019.10.17 2019나11803

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) 수원고등법원 2019.10.17 2019나11803

소유권말소등기

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.

2. Appeal;

Reasons

1. The reasoning for this part of the underlying facts is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for cases where the reasoning is written or added as follows. Thus, this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (from No. 2 to No. 5)

The following shall be added to the fourth and fifth of the first instance judgment:

Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1), the defendant may terminate the trust in consultation with the plaintiff when it is impossible or considerably difficult to achieve the purpose of the trust or to perform the trust affairs due to any other reasonable cause, such as a change in economic situation, etc., and in such cases, the defendant shall continue to pay the balance until the present time."

The following shall be added to the fifth instance judgment following the second instance judgment:

E. On May 28, 2018, the Plaintiff notified the co-defendant B (hereinafter “B”) of the first instance trial that the instant sales contract would be rescinded on the grounds of the remainder due to the delivery of a duplicate of the instant complaint.

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The plaintiff quoted in the judgment of the court of first instance changed his claim in the first instance to the primary claim.

The reasoning for this part of this Court is as follows, and with respect to the argument that the plaintiff added in the appellate court, the court shall either dismiss or add part of this part as follows:

With the exception of adding a judgment identical to the foregoing paragraph, it is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (from 6th to 6th 10th ) and thus, it is quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

(In view of the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff in addition to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the first instance court, the fact-finding and judgment of the first instance court is justifiable). The seventh, 17, and 18 of the first instance court were followed as follows.

D. The plaintiff's affirmative deception by B's employees.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2017.09.29 2017나2008195

-서울고등법원 2018.02.09 2016나2049144

-수원고등법원 2020.01.30 2019나13823

-수원고등법원 2020.12.10 2020나14020

-대전고등법원 2019.05.30 2019나10178