logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2016.10.27 2016나51149
손해배상금
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the money ordering Defendant E Co., Ltd. to pay the following amounts:

Reasons

1. The reasons why this Court shall state this part of the basic facts are cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except where the term “Plaintiff A and the Defendant” in Chapter 15 of the judgment of the court of first instance is deemed to read “the Plaintiff A and the Defendant” as “the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company”. As such, this part of the judgment of the court of first instance

2. Determination as to Plaintiff A’s claim against the Defendants

A. The reason why the court should explain this part of the main claim is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance No. 8, which is the same as that of the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main part

(The first instance court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim against the primary claim, and the said Plaintiff also filed an appeal, but does not clearly state the grounds for appeal.

The reason for the court's explanation on this part is that the part of "the judgment of the court of first instance No. 9, No. 3 (2)" is identical to that of the corresponding part of No. 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following changes, and therefore, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act (A). (2) The evidence submitted by the plaintiffs as to the plaintiff A's claim for all damages or agreed amount of damages incurred by the plaintiff A in relation to the business of taking and taking and taking and taking off the two-waves, is insufficient to recognize that the defendants agreed to jointly and severally liable for all damages incurred by the plaintiff A in relation to the business of taking and taking

Plaintiff

A’s above assertion is without merit.

(B) The judgment of Plaintiff A on the claim for the agreed amount under the instant agreement against Defendant D was made by the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company, and is the representative director of the Defendant Company that delegated the preparation of the instant agreement to Defendant C.

arrow