(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.09.09 2014나2023094

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 2015.09.09 2014나2023094

철강재반환 등

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

In the process, on December 10, 2012, the Plaintiff, A, and B drafted a letter of non-performance by designating the Plaintiff as a creditor, debtor, and joint and several surety, and the content related to the Defendant is as follows.

After all, A and B did not properly perform the terms agreed in the above landmark, and on February 7, 2013, the Plaintiff notified A of the content-certified mail that the lease agreement for each steel product including the instant lease agreement will be terminated, and that the return of the leased steel product would be requested.

E. Meanwhile, Article 6(2) of the instant lease agreement provides that if the return of goods is impossible, HON beam 860,000 won per 1 TONn beam shall be separately compensated for other than rent. The market price of 100 tons general key is 60,000 won per opening, and the steel materials leased under the instant lease agreement and carried out without permission at the site of the instant construction without return to the Plaintiff are 300*300 tons, Hn beam 37.13 tons, 700*300 tons, hn beam 1.658 tons, 100 tons general key.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) The plaintiff's assertion (1) The summary of the plaintiff's assertion is that ① the defendant's on-site manager, as he/she has jointly and severally guaranteed the defendant's obligations as a tenant of A, such as returning steel materials by representing the defendant in relation to the lease contract of this case, the defendant shall be held liable as a joint and several surety. ② Even if H has no right to stand as a joint and several surety on behalf of the defendant, the plaintiff was believed to have such right, and there is a justifiable reason to believe that H has such right, and thus, the defendant shall be held liable for the expression agency. ③ Even if the defendant is not held liable for the contract of this case, H, who is an employee of the defendant, shall be jointly

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2014.12.05 2014노1505

-인천지방법원 2016.06.28 2015나54301

-수원지방법원안산지원 2016.04.28 2014가합21417

-서울남부지방법원 2017.11.17 2017나860

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2019.01.22 2018고단2363