(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.11.19 2019나70684

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) 인천지방법원 2020.11.19 2019나70684

약정금

Text

1. The appeal by the defendant (appointed party) is dismissed;

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant (appointed party).

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation regarding this case is that “5,000 won per 1 gambling house and 5,000 won per 1 gambling house” in the fourth 10th 10th 10th 10 of the judgment of the court of first instance, even if the defendant (appointed party; hereinafter “the defendant”) considered all the arguments and evidence supplemented by the appellate court, shall be used as “5,000 won per 5,00 won per 1 gambling house and 5,000 won per 1 gambling house (up to May 11, 2018) or 1,000 won per 1 gambling house (up to May 11, 2018),” and it shall be cited as the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the following additional judgments are added. Therefore, it shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant’s determination of KRW 1,00 per house 1 gambling house as the Defendant’s revenue pursuant to the agreement (A1) with the Plaintiff on October 16, 2017 constitutes an unfair juristic act and thus null and void.

However, there is a substantial imbalance between the payment and the consideration at the time of the above agreement only with the evidence submitted by the defendant

It is difficult to conclude that an agreement was concluded with the Defendant’s initiative or experience.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. The Defendant asserts that: (a) each letter of transfer of the right of the vehicle on February 10, 2018 (A8) and the monetary loan agreement of KRW 44,000,000 on April 4, 2018 (A2) are invalid because it was written by the Plaintiff’s deception that the Defendant would not be able to pay the settlement amount for the last time, or that it would be able to pay the settlement amount for the last time.

However, in light of the fact that the Defendant prepared a self-written confirmation confirming that the Defendant had a debt to the Plaintiff several times, and the amount of the debt increased depending on the passage of time, the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to support the Defendant’s assertion.

The defendant's assertion on this part is without merit.

3. The decision of the first instance court on the conclusion is justifiable.

The appeal by the defendant (appointed party) is dismissed for lack of grounds.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-대구고등법원 2016.09.21 2016나20252

-부산고등법원 2013.10.31 2012나9874

-인천지방법원 2019.02.20 2018가합462

-서울남부지방법원 2018.10.11 2018나54895

-서울동부지방법원 2017.10.25 2017나21093