(영문) 의정부지방법원 2018.06.22 2017재머13

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) 의정부지방법원 2018.06.22 2017재머13

투자금반환

Text

1. The quasi-examination of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of quasi-examination shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The following facts are clearly indicated in the record of the quasi-examination protocol.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the return of investment money, such as the statement in the purport of the claim, with the District Court 2016Gahap2021.

B. The instant case was submitted to the conciliation center conciliation under the same court 2017 money70787, and the conciliation was concluded on April 20, 2017, and the quasi-deliberation protocol, stating the following agreed matters, was prepared.

1) The Defendant consented to preferentially recover USD 217,369 from the Plaintiff’s disposal of stone 6-70,000,000,000 in Cambodia, which the Plaintiff managed, from among the remaining money sold, 5% of the sales of stone shall be the Plaintiff’s sales commission, and the remainder shall be paid to the Defendant.

3) In disposing of the stone as referred to in paragraphs (1) and (2) above, the Plaintiff shall dispose of it between 80 to 100% of the market price, and the content of the disposal shall be notified to the Defendant in writing within seven days after the disposal of stone. 4) The Plaintiff’s remaining claims are waived.

5 Costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person.

2. Whether the grounds for quasi-examination are legitimate;

A. The stone for which the Plaintiff intended to dispose of in accordance with the mediation protocol subject to quasi-re-deliberation that the Plaintiff asserted, was established based on the Defendant’s erroneous statement even though the actual stock quantity or quality falls far less than the originally anticipated quantity, and it was impossible to sell without the Defendant’s cooperation.

Therefore, the conciliation protocol subject to quasi-examination lacks judgment on important matters, and there is a ground for quasi-examination under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. Determination adjustment is established by the procedural acts to terminate a lawsuit according to an agreement between the parties within the conciliation procedure, and there is no room for the court to intervene in the decision.

Accordingly, the matters agreed upon in the conciliation.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제451조 제1항 제9호

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2020.08.25 2020가단102655

-수원지방법원 2018.01.25 2017나66053

-수원지방법원 2016.08.25 2016노784

-수원지방법원평택지원 2017.05.19 2015가단41454

-전주지방법원 정읍지원 2018.02.08 2017가단1675