logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.08.12 2019나79312
부당이득금
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 reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: (a) the defendant added or emphasized the argument that the defendant added or emphasized in this court; and (b) the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance are the same as those for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of “3.

2. Parts to be dried;

(a) No. 16 of the second instance judgment of the court of first instance shall be subject to the "Evidence A1 to 10" with "Evidence A 1 to 5, 7, 8, 9, and No. 1".

B. On June 5, 2018, the third through 21 of the judgment of the court of first instance, “The plaintiffs met the defendant at the G Certified Judicial Scriveners Office designated by the defendant on June 5, 2018, which is the remaining payment date. The defendant demanded the plaintiffs to pay the amount equivalent to the secured debt amount of the instant right to collateral security out of the remainder 910,000,000,000 to G certified judicial scrivener. The plaintiffs asserted that the remaining amount of KRW 910,00,000 should be preserved in G until the registration of ownership transfer should be completed. The plaintiffs who were not obliged to keep the purport that the defendant would succeed to the secured debt of the instant right to collateral security of this case. However, the defendant rejected this [refer to the part 9,00,00, which is not acceptable].”

C. The third part of the judgment of the court of first instance in the 22th part of the judgment "licensed real estate agents on the seller and seller" shall be construed as "licensed real estate agents on the buyer and seller."

On June 26, 2018, the first instance court sent a text message to the Defendant on June 26, 2018, stating that “In the event of the return of the above content-certified mail, the Plaintiff B sent a photograph of the above content-certified mail to urge the Defendant to respond.”

The Defendant called the Plaintiff B at night, but the Plaintiff B was unable to receive the call.

Plaintiff

B was drank to the Defendant at night on June 27, 2018.

arrow