2018Na305855 Compensation for damages

A

A Incorporated Foundation B

[Plaintiff-Appellee] Law Firm 100

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 2 others

Busan District Court Decision 2017Kadan10972 Decided April 11, 2018

December 6, 2018

January 31, 2019

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. Of the purport of the judgment of the court of first instance, “50,788,90 won” shall be corrected to “50,778,990 won”.

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 50,778,90 won with 15% interest per annum from January 17, 2018 to the day of complete payment, which is the day following the service of the application for modification of the purport and cause of the claim of this case.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The court of first instance recognized the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance by viewing the evidence submitted by the plaintiff in this court, witness G, and I's testimony from the evidence submitted by the plaintiff in this court. The reason for the judgment of the court of first instance is to add "the part added to 2.2. next to the third th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th," and "the conclusion 4.th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th

2. The addition;

○○○ “C. Therefore, the Defendant is liable for damages for nonperformance or tort to the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant added KRW 778,990, out of the medical expenses incurred by the Plaintiff due to legacy after the instant accident, and KRW 50,778,990,00,000,000,000,000 for emotional distress incurred due to the Plaintiff’s external appearance, despite the Plaintiff’s occurrence of legacy after the instant accident, and KRW 50,78,990,000 (= + KRW 778,990 + KRW 50,00) and damages for delay.”

○ 3. Determination on this Safety Defense

A. Summary of the assertion

The defendant asserts that the contents of the claim for damages filed by the plaintiff against H should be against the farming association corporation H, so the defendant is not entitled to the lawsuit of this case.

B. Determination

However, in a performance lawsuit, a person who asserts that he/she is a person entitled to sue and has the standing to sue, and is not required to be the plaintiff and the defendant to be the person in charge of performance (see Supreme Court Decision 96Da13927, Sept. 18, 1998). Therefore, as long as the plaintiff claims for damages against the defendant, it is recognized that he/she has the standing to be the defendant, the defendant's safety defense is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is justified, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed, and the "50,788,990 won" in the judgment of the court of first instance is clear that it is a clerical error of "50,778,990 won" in the judgment of the court of first instance, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Sung-hee

Judges Maintenance Award

Judges Yang Democratic