(영문) 서울고등법원(춘천) 2020.04.22 2019나50999

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) 서울고등법원(춘천) 2020.04.22 2019나50999

어음금

Text

1. On the part of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s debtor B, according to the claim of the principal lawsuit that had been changed in exchange in this court.

Reasons

1. The first instance court, within the scope of this court’s adjudication, accepted part of the Plaintiff’s main claim, dismissed the remainder of the claim, and dismissed the Plaintiff’s counterclaim.

In this regard, only B appealed about the part against which the principal lawsuit was lost, and since the defendant taken over the lawsuit, the scope of the trial of this court is limited to the part of the principal lawsuit

2. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance is used as follows (3) and the judgment is supplemented or added as provided in paragraph (4). Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance

3. All "Defendants" in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be added to "B".

4 The following shall be added on the 7th day below:

“E. On the other hand, B filed an application for rehabilitation with the District Court on February 27, 2018. On April 12, 2018, B received a decision on commencing the rehabilitation procedure from the above court on April 12, 2018, and the Defendant was appointed as a legal administrator under B (Seoul District Court Decision 2018Nu1006). (f) On August 9, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a rehabilitation claim report with the above court on which the instant promissorysory note claim is a rehabilitation claim. On September 23, 2019, the Defendant denied the said rehabilitation claim on the grounds that the instant lawsuit is pending on the date of the special investigation into the instant rehabilitation case. On September 25, 2019, the Plaintiff requested the instant court to take over the parties to the instant case as the custodian of the said case, including the evidence Nos. 1, No. 21, No. 21, No. 21, and No. 21, No.

5. From the 5th one to the 3th one, the term "Therefore," to "Gu," shall be amended as follows:

Therefore, the Plaintiff is against B, the issuer of the Promissory Notes of this case.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울고등법원(춘천) 2020.04.22 2019나51572

-대전고등법원 (청주) 2021.02.03 2019나3555

-서울고등법원 2018.05.29 2017누76366

-서울고등법원 (춘천) 2021.04.23 2020나990

-광주고등법원 2020.05.08 2019누10510