(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.09.21 2016나2069452

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) 서울고등법원 2017.09.21 2016나2069452

부당이득금

Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the Defendant B-Building Improvement Project Housing Association shall be revoked, and the revoked part shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is as follows, and the relevant part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, on the ground that the court’s acceptance of the judgment of the first instance is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition of Paragraph 3 to the judgment of set-off defense

2. The height part 7 pages 10,000 "1,00,000" shall be deemed to read "437,290,276 won".

In the 8th 3th 4th 7th 8th 3th 4th 3th 4th 3th 4th 3th 4th 3th 4th 3th 4th 4th 5th 4th 4th 4th 4th 5th 4th 5th 5th 4th 4th 4th 5

10 Myeon 16 "10,000,000" shall be "437,290,276 won".

The “B No. 5” at the bottom of the 11th page shall be raised with “B No. 5”.

3. Determination of set-off by the Defendant’s housing association

A. The Defendant’s association’s assertion that the Defendant’s association claimed against the Plaintiff has a claim equivalent to a judgment amounting to KRW 679,305,707 (i.e., the principal amount of KRW 312,354,000 from August 24, 2010 to January 31, 2017) with respect to liquidated damages, and has a claim for indemnity amounting to KRW 150,000 with respect to the loan obligation against the Sam Young Capital Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Yong Capital”). If the Plaintiff’s claim for restitution of unjust enrichment against the Defendant’s housing association is recognized, the said claim and indemnity claim against the Plaintiff of the Defendant’s housing association shall be offset in order by each of the aforementioned claim for restitution of unjust enrichment.

B. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings, the following facts are recognized in the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 20 and 21.

1. The completion of the apartment of this case filed against the plaintiff by the defendant's association for liquidated damages.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2020.02.07 2019누51132

-의정부지방법원 2016.08.25 2014가합55014

-서울고등법원 2019.01.17 2018나2038421

-대법원 2003. 7. 11. 선고 2001다73626 판결

-서울고등법원 2018.07.19 2017나2001910