logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.05.17 2016나84322
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except for the addition of the following "2. Additional Judgment" as to the allegations added by the plaintiff in this court, and therefore, they are quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff asserts that the lawsuit in this case is a claim for ownership transfer registration based on the promise of accord and satisfaction entered into separately with G Co., Ltd. on April 1, 2003, and that the subject matter of the lawsuit is different from the prior lawsuit.

The evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the defendant et al. entered into an accord and satisfaction agreement on April 1, 2003 separate from the contract for construction work entered into with G Co., Ltd. on March 28, 2003, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit without examining it.

3. Thus, the judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow