logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2020.05.28 2018다280231
손해배상(기)
Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff (appointed party).

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, even in cases where the representative authority of a juristic person has been extinguished during the litigation proceedings, if the representative authority of the juristic person has not been notified to the other party, the representative authority in the litigation proceedings shall be deemed not extinguished (Article 64 and Article 63(1) of the Civil Procedure Act). Thus, even if the representative director, who was the defendant's representative director, retired during the proceedings of the court below, and the new representative director was appointed, unless the defendant notified the plaintiff (appointed party) of the change of the representative director, it cannot be deemed that the

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Ja171, Nov. 23, 2006). Therefore, we cannot accept the allegation in the grounds of appeal on the purport that there exists a defect in the Defendant’s representative authority in the lower judgment.

2. On the grounds of appeal Nos. 2 through 4, the court below rejected the claim for damages of this case by the plaintiff et al. on the ground that it is difficult to find that the plaintiff et al. and the designated parties (hereinafter referred to as "the plaintiff et al.") have any intention or negligence to constitute tort against the call measures taken domestically against C mobile phones manufactured and sold by the defendant, and that even if the plaintiff (appointed parties and the designated parties together with the designated parties (hereinafter referred to as "the plaintiff et al.") temporarily feel uneasiness or psychological fear before such measures were taken, it is difficult to find that the above measures were taken to protect the larger legal interests of the plaintiff et al., which are the safety of life and body of the plaintiff et al., based on Article 13(1) of the Framework Act on Product Safety.

The relevant legal principles and records.

arrow