(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.11.01 2019나52157

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) 수원지방법원 2019.11.01 2019나52157

배당이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the argument of the court of first instance except for the following "2. Additional Judgment", and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justified even when comprehensively considering the evidence newly submitted to the court of first instance in this court.

The court's explanation on the instant case is not only a second copy of the judgment of the court of first instance.

1. Subparagraph 5 of paragraph (a) of this Article, “ Most of the above deposits” shall be used as “320 million won out of the above deposits,” and the number of pages 4 [based on recognition] shall add “B 6 through 9” respectively, and the following “2. Additional Judgment” shall be the same as the part of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition of the part “2. Additional Judgment”, and such part shall be cited, including summary language, pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant, upon entering into the instant sub-lease contract with D, was established by the method of occupation and revision for various facilities in the instant marina, in order to secure the claim for the refund of lease deposit, and thereafter, the said security was disposed of to a third party. The Defendant’s overdue rent that should be deducted from the claim for the refund of lease deposit also reaches KRW 13,854,587.

Therefore, the obligation to return the lease deposit to the Defendant, which is the principal obligation, was extinguished, and the guaranteed obligation of the Plaintiff against the Defendant was also extinguished according to the subsidiary nature.

B. The burden of proving the grounds for objection against distribution in a lawsuit of demurrer 1 is also in accordance with the principle of allocation of the burden of proof in general civil procedure. In the event that the plaintiff asserts that the defendant's claim has not been constituted, the defendant is liable to prove the facts of the cause of the claim, and where the plaintiff asserts that the claim has been invalidated as a false declaration of conspiracy or extinguished as a result of repayment, the plaintiff

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-전주지방법원정읍지원 2014.01.07 2013가단5570

-서울남부지방법원 2015.10.08 2015가단17207

-인천지방법원 2020.07.16 2019나68339

-서울고등법원 2020.12.10 2020나2018277

-수원지방법원 2015.05.22 2014나35515