(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.06.04 2019나2024658

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 2020.06.04 2019나2024658

소유권이전등기

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the entry of this case by the court of first instance concerning this case are as stated in Paragraph 2, and the decision on the assertion added by the plaintiff in this court is as stated in Paragraph 3 below, and therefore, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(hereinafter the meaning of the abbreviationd language used in this context is the same as the judgment of the court of first instance). 2. Amendment to the part 3.00, "G" in Part 7 in the third page shall be applied to "P".

The 6th parallel "Plaintiffs" in the 4th parallel shall be raised to "Defendants".

Part 7 of the last 12 "L" shall be construed as "corporation reduction or employee reduction division", "L" as " Q", and "execution officer" as "City Corporation".

3. Additional determination

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Deceased had the authority to represent the Plaintiff as an outside director of the Defendant. The conclusion of the instant contract and the preparation of the instant agreement were conducted at the office of the Deceased located in the Defendant’s company. The Plaintiff received from the Deceased a delegation contract stating that the Defendant delegated the business selection and advisory services to the Deceased, and the delegation contract was signed and sealed with the Defendant’s official seal. Accordingly, the Defendant bears the responsibility for the expressive representative director regarding the deceased’s act, who received a total sum of KRW 320 million from the Plaintiff. (2) The Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to return the said KRW 320 million to the Defendant, as the restitution based on the rescission of the contract.

B. In order to establish the liability of the company due to the act of an apparent representative director as stipulated in Article 395 of the Commercial Act, judgment on the assertion of apparent representative director, a director, who is not the representative director of the company, shall make a transaction using a name that may be recognized as having the power

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

-상법 제395조

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2020.06.05 2019나62627

-서울고등법원 2016.11.24 2016나2013770

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.03 2016나54659

-서울고등법원 2016.12.01 2016누46719

-서울고등법원 2018.09.06 2017나2031102