logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.12.05 2019나55574
위자료
Text

1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning the instant case is as follows: ① (a) the third parallel “in January 201” of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as “in November 201,” and (b) the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the part of the “decision on the merits” of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following paragraph (2). Therefore, the relevant part is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Where a final and conclusive judgment has become final and conclusive, any assertion or defense arising prior to the closure of pleadings at a fact-finding court is prohibited by res judicata of the final and conclusive judgment, and thus, it is not allowed for the parties to new arguments contrary to the contents of the final and conclusive judgment.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the court below held that the plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant is identical to this case and the judgment against the plaintiff has become final and conclusive (the above judgment against the plaintiff was a claim for consolation money according to the rule of good faith). The ground alleged by the plaintiff in the lawsuit in this case constitutes a ground that the plaintiff could have been submitted before the closing of argument at the court of fact-finding, and thus, the plaintiff cannot be newly asserted against the contents of the above final and conclusive judgment, and this court cannot make a decision inconsistent with the above final and conclusive judgment.

Therefore, we cannot accept the plaintiff's main claim.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim on the merits is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow