(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.09.27 2018나119382

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) 대전지방법원 2019.09.27 2018나119382

토지인도 등

Text

1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, and the defendant's assertion added by this court is identical to the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of "2. Additional Judgment" as to the assertion added by this court, and thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

The term "2010, 30, 30" during the term of lease No. 2 of the No. 4 [Attachment 1-2] is changed on March 30, 2010.

4) The “Jho” as stipulated in Section 2 of the Sheshesheshesheet the “Kho” as the “Kho.” The 5th [based on recognition] and the 9th one are regarded as the “appraisal of the first instance trial.” The 5th 2th 5th Ga puts the “Article 2” as stipulated in Section 2 of the 5th Ga.

2. Additional determination

A. Defendant’s assertion 1) The third lease agreement merely has been formally prepared with the intent that the Plaintiff would have the right to receive compensation upon the transfer of the instant land into I, and thus, is null and void as a false declaration of agreement. 2) The Plaintiff left the farm house until the Plaintiff is incorporated into I, which led to a request for the Defendant to prepare a contract with a two-year rental period for the convenience of the Plaintiff’s transfer into I, and that the Defendant affixed his seal on the third lease agreement. As such, the said declaration of intention in the grounds of appeal is revoked.

Therefore, the third lease contract is null and void.

B. The aforementioned assertion is not acceptable inasmuch as the testimony of the witness Eul-4 or 6 and the witness L of the trial party alone is insufficient to acknowledge the above assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. Conclusion, the defendant's appeal against the main lawsuit and counterclaim is all dismissed.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 2020.10.23 2019나118188

-대전지방법원 2019.12.06 2019나102435

-서울고등법원 2018.11.01 2018누53391

-춘천지방법원 2017.09.27 2016나53965

-대구지방법원 2018.07.04 2018나303569