logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2015.06.11 2014나53929
구상금
Text

1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the court's explanation of this case are as follows, except for the part of the judgment of the court of first instance 2-b of the part of the judgment of the court of first instance 2-2 of the judgment of the court of first instance 2-2 of the subsequent part of the judgment of the court of first instance 2-2 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and such part is cited (Provided, That "the defendant" of the 5th judgment of the court of first instance 13 of the court of first instance refers to "B" and "115,23,334 won" of the 6th judgment 7th judgment 115,233,34 won" and "the 115,233,334 won", and "the 6th judgment of the court of first instance 2).

According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the instant lease agreement between the Plaintiff and Jung exists lawfully until September 3, 201, which is the expiration date of the contract, notwithstanding the instant transfer agreement between the Plaintiff and Jungeo, even though it was based on the instant transfer agreement.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, the lessee, who is obligated to pay the rent arising during the lawful period of existence of the instant lease agreement to B, is the Plaintiff, and the Defendant cannot be deemed to bear the above payment obligation solely on the ground that the instant lease agreement is a direct occupant of the instant store. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion on this part of the Plaintiff’s right to reimbursement cannot be accepted on a different premise

- If the instant transfer contract between the Plaintiff and Jung-ok was concluded as anticipated by the original parties to the contract, obtained B’s consent, and paid that the Defendant is a tea, it would have been deemed that the Plaintiff could not have suffered damages from overdue payment through offset, but it would have been possible for the Plaintiff to claim damages against Jung-ok under the instant transfer contract, and further pay it to the Defendant.

arrow