(영문) 전주지방법원 2017.06.22 2016나7794 | 리걸엔진

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) 전주지방법원 2017.06.22 2016나7794

계금

Text

1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, given that the reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following “the part which is dismissed or added.”

2. From 3rd to 15th of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part to be dismissed or added is as follows.

1) The Defendant did not pay KRW 2,500,000 per month from September 25, 2014 to June 25, 2015 ( KRW 250,000 per month x 10 months).

In addition, the Defendant did not pay KRW 5,500,000 for monthly fraternitys Nos. 5 from the second fraternitys. With respect to the portion of said second fraternitys 1/2 from August 14, 2013 to October 14, 2014, the Defendant paid the aggregate of KRW 3,000,000 for monthly fraternitys ( KRW 200,000 x 15 x 15 times) from around November 14, 2014. The Plaintiff should return the said KRW 3,00,000 to the Defendant in relation to the second fraternitys, and if the Defendant deducts the aforementioned amount from the said KRW 5,50,000 that the Defendant should pay to the Plaintiff, the amount of the unpaid monthly fraternitys shall be KRW 2,500,000.

2) Therefore, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 2,500,000,000 and that of KRW 2,500,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, which are not paid in the first place and the second place (the Plaintiff shall be paid in the first place with respect to the amount paid in the second place) (it did not extend the purport of the claim in accordance with its assertion while changing its assertion that the amount was not KRW 1,50,000,000,000,000, not KRW 2,500,000,000.

(2) On the other hand, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff did not have any dispute” in the first instance judgment No. 5, 200,000 won, and on the other hand, there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff paid the amount exceeding KRW 1,50,000 to the Defendant, as seen earlier in the first instance judgment, and rather, according to the description of the evidence No. 3, the Plaintiff’s deposit of KRW 250,000 to the Defendant on September 24, 2014, and KRW 250,000 on November 25, 2014.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2020.03.05 2019가단2012

-광주지방법원 2018.02.20 2016가단530203

-창원지방법원통영지원 2017.11.17 2016가단26289

-서울서부지방법원 2013.11.14 2013고정330