(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.30 2016나77362

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.30 2016나77362

임대차보증금반환등

Text

1. The judgment of the first instance court, including a counterclaim that has been changed in exchange at the trial court, shall be modified as follows.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff sought compensation of KRW 35,00,000 for damages arising from the interference with the collection of deposit money of KRW 10,000,000 and premium of KRW 35,00,00 in the principal lawsuit of this case. The defendant claimed compensation for damages arising from the delivery of the building of this case, the removal of the building of this case, the delivery of the building of this case, and the provisional building of this case, and the imposition of KRW 1,430,816 for enforcement fine to the defendant.

The first instance court partly accepted the claim of deposit in the principal lawsuit of this case, and dismissed the remainder of the principal lawsuit. Among the counterclaim claims of this case, the removal of the building of this case and the delivery claim of the site of this case were accepted, and the delivery claim of the building of this case was partly accepted, and all the other counterclaim claims were dismissed.

On the other hand, only the plaintiff appealed part of KRW 25,00,000 among the damages due to the refund of KRW 10,000,000 and the obstruction of collecting the premium. In the first instance trial, the defendant voluntarily withdrawn all the old counterclaim and requested for the payment of KRW 10,00,000 or KRW 833,333 of the lease deposit incurred in excess of KRW 10,000 until the delivery and execution of the building of this case.

(2) The judgment of the court below is limited to KRW 10,00,000 of the Plaintiff’s deposit, KRW 25,000,000 of the damages claim, and KRW 833,333 of the Defendant’s damages claim.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed to be filed together.

2. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is that the following is added to the “1. Recognition” portion of the judgment of the court of first instance, and that the “Defendant 3’s drawings” of the 3th page 17 is cited as “attached Form 3,” and that the deletion of the 4th page 16 and 17 is the same as the part of the “1. Recognition” portion of the judgment of the court of first instance, and that is, as it is, in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2016.12.21 2016나2033187

-서울북부지방법원 2019.02.21 2018나30670

-울산지방법원 2019.05.23 2018나23711

-부산지방법원 2019.11.01 2019나47551

-서울서부지방법원 2014.07.25 2012나2020