beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning the instant case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following parts, including the judgment on the Defendant’s argument brought at the trial. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Parts used or added;
A. The “witness” in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be written by all “a witness of the court of first instance”.
Part 2 of the judgment of the first instance, " August 15, 2012" in Part 16, "No. 5, 2012," "No. 5-2," "No. 5-2," in Part 3, No. 10, "No. 5-2," and "the plaintiff in Part 4, No. 9," shall be added to "the original defendant".
B. Subsequent to the 3rd written judgment of the first instance court, “Plaintiff” was added to “Plaintiff from March 17, 2013 to May 9, 2013,” and “7,202,340 won” of “7,202,340 won” of the last sentence of the 3rd judgment [the detailed details are as shown in attached Table 1] 5,280,340 won in cash (the detailed details are as listed in attached Table 2).
C. From Nos. 5 to 13 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the following shall be followed.
"2 also, the defendant has a defense to the effect that it offsets the above loan claims against the plaintiff by the above loan claims, since October 1, 2012 to December 30, 2012. The defendant completed the plaintiff's construction work of J Housing and warehouse in Gyeong-gun, Seongbuk-gun, Seongbuk-gun, and 9.4 million won.
In light of the statements and images of evidence Nos. 8, 9, and 12, and the testimony of witness H of the first instance trial, the Defendant contracted the above construction from the Plaintiff solely with the descriptions of evidence Nos. 2 and 6.
It is difficult to recognize that he/she was paid wages in relation to the above construction work, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
“”
3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is concluded.