logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.05.22 2018재나161
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff, or Plaintiff for retrial).

Reasons

1. Following the confirmation of the judgment subject to a retrial is apparent or clear according to the records. A.

On June 7, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a principal lawsuit against the Defendant and the co-defendant C fishing village fraternity of the first instance trial against the Defendant and the co-defendant C fishing village fraternity of the first instance court seeking compensation for damage. On July 26, 2017, the Defendant filed a counterclaim against the Plaintiff at the same court 2017Da3726, supra. On October 18, 2017, the said court dismissed all the Plaintiff’s principal claim against the Defendant and the co-defendant C fishing village fraternity of the first instance trial, and rendered a judgment citing the Defendant’s counterclaim (hereinafter “the first instance judgment”).

B. Accordingly, on November 3, 2017, the Plaintiff appealed from the judgment of the first instance as to the part against the Defendant in the Changwon District Court No. 2017Na5898 (Main Claim), 2017Na5907 (Counterclaim). On August 23, 2018, the above court partially accepted the Plaintiff’s appeal as to the Plaintiff’s principal lawsuit and counterclaim. Of the part against the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the first instance, the part against the Defendant in the amount equivalent to the order to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 31,274,00 and delay damages therefor was revoked, and the part against the Plaintiff in the judgment of the first instance against the Defendant in the part against the Plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance, which ordered the Defendant to pay KRW 3,60,000,000 to the Defendant in excess of the damages for delay, and rendered a judgment dismissing the Defendant’s claim corresponding to the revoked part (hereinafter “the judgment subject to retrial”).

C. Accordingly, the Defendant appealed as Supreme Court Decision 2018Da267146, 2018Da267153 (Counterclaim), but the Supreme Court rendered a decision to dismiss the Defendant’s final appeal on November 29, 2018, which became final and conclusive as it is, by means of the Supreme Court’s decision to dismiss the Defendant’s final appeal.

2. Determination as to the existence of a ground for retrial

A. Defendant’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s written confirmation of the facts as of September 27, 2017, which was submitted as reference materials on September 27, 2017 by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant factual confirmation”).

Of the instant accidents, the instant case also takes place prior to the instant accident.

arrow