(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.06.12 2014나3990 | 리걸엔진

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) 부산지방법원 2015.06.12 2014나3990

물품대금

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. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

A. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the part of “the witness C’s testimony” of the first instance court No. 3 is deleted; and (b) the Defendant added a judgment on the matters asserted in the trial at the court of the first instance; and (c) the reasoning for the judgment at the court of the first instance is as stated in the text of Article 42

B. On January 29, 2015, after the pronouncement of the judgment of the first instance court of this case, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s assertion that the testimony consistent with the Plaintiff’s argument made by the first instance court C was an perjury and was sentenced to a fine of two million won for perjury, and that the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant goods were not returned and processed cannot be accepted any more.

According to the statements in the evidence Nos. 7 and 8 (including paper numbers), C was present at the trial of the first instance on October 1, 2013, and testified. The facts are as follows: (a) around August 2012, the Defendant requested return of approximately 9,00 km out of 14,987km supplied by the Plaintiff; and (b) the Defendant was unaware of whether the head of the ice material not returned at the end of December 2012 when he retired from his work remains in the place of material storage; (c) even though the Defendant was unaware of whether the ice material not returned at the end of December 2012 remains in the place of material storage; and (d) on the examination, “It was recognized that the Defendant made any product using the ice material not returned, which was supplied by the Defendant, and the Defendant gave testimony to Defendant 21, 201, on the ground that it was made in the place of material storage, and that Defendant 200,000 won was sold.”

However, even if C was sentenced to a fine for perjury as above, there should be evidence to acknowledge the Defendant’s assertion that the instant goods were returned to the Plaintiff as seen earlier.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2015.01.29 2014고정1460

-대구지방법원 2016.04.08 2015노756

-광주고등법원 2020.01.08 2019나23892

-서울동부지방법원 2020.01.10 2018나27319