(영문) 부산고등법원 2019.03.13 2018나55404

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) 부산고등법원 2019.03.13 2018나55404

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claims added by this court are dismissed, respectively.

2. The costs of the lawsuit after the appeal are filed.

Reasons

The reasoning of the court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition to the following Paragraph 2. Thus, this is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In addition, "43" in the fifth 15th 15th son of the judgment of the first instance shall be added to "51,58", and the following shall be added to the end of the 19th st century:

The plaintiff asserts that "the defendant shall compensate the plaintiff for 158,267,520 won, including the estimated earnings equivalent to 30% of the estimated amount (327,558,400 won) presented to D, and the part, material cost, 60,00,00 won which the plaintiff predicted and prepared in advance to enter into a purchase contract," although it is recognized that there is no particular difference in the drawing drawing of D's unmanned transportation vehicle system in the name of the plaintiff and C, the plaintiff could not enter into a purchase contract with D. Thus, the plaintiff cannot accept the plaintiff's assertion that "the evidence No. 57 was prepared from the plaintiff 56,50,00,00 won, or the part, material cost, 60,000 won which the plaintiff proposed and prepared in advance to enter into a purchase contract," and "the plaintiff cannot accept the plaintiff's argument No. 167,57," and "the plaintiff's additional evidence No. 167," written in the above statement No. 57.

The part of the judgment of the first instance court 5-6 '2' to 4 'A' is added as evidence which is insufficient to recognize the plaintiff's assertion as evidence that is insufficient to recognize the plaintiff's assertion.

The following shall be added to the sixth 17th sentence of the first instance judgment:

“5) The Plaintiff shall determine the return of unjust enrichment or the claim for damages on the ground of the violation of the performance letter.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-부산고등법원 2019.11.13 2018나58472

-서울고등법원 2017.11.30 2017누66406

-서울고등법원 2011. 9. 2. 선고 2011나21183(본소),2011나21190(반소) 판결

-부산고등법원 2019.06.05 2018나58731

-부산고등법원 2018.05.09 2017나55254