beta
Text
The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
judgment of the first instance.
Reasons
1. The reasoning for this part of the underlying facts is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the court received “this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance 3, 10, i.e., the execution rejection of this case on the following grounds has the effect on the Defendant.” The execution rejection of this case on the following grounds, respectively, is based on the “payment date of the agreement” of the same 11, and the same part of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following to the 12th following the same one, and thus, it is cited in accordance with the main text of
“A. D. The actual representative director of the defendant or the defendant’s representative has the authority to prepare the statement of execution of this case. B. Even if D does not have the authority to prepare the statement of this case, D has the basic power to conclude a monetary loan contract for consumption for the defendant, and purchase medicines for the defendant. At the time of preparation of the statement of performance of this case, D has the defendant’s seal impression, certificate of personal seal, name plate, and lease contract for the defendant’s office, and as the plaintiff has justifiable reason to believe that D has the authority to prepare the statement of performance of this case on behalf of the defendant, D bears the responsibility to act on behalf of the defendant under Article 126 of the Civil Act.”
3. Determination D is a principle that it is not entitled to represent the company as long as it is not the representative director of the company (i.e., the representative director of the company) who is the actual representative of the defendant, and therefore, even if a third party substantially controls the company, a juristic act done in the name of the third party under the name of the company shall be null and void as it is an unauthorized representation, unless it is exceptionally liable by the legal principles of the apparent representative director, etc.
b) the corporation;