(영문) 청주지방법원 영동지원 2018.02.09 2017가단4637

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) 청주지방법원 영동지원 2018.02.09 2017가단4637

채무부존재확인

Text

1. The part concerning the claim for the confirmation of existence of an obligation among the lawsuits in this case shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 48,176,410 and its amount.

Reasons

1. The description of the grounds for the claim shall be as specified in the attached Form;

(Provided, That the “applicant” of the cause of the claim before the addition shall be deemed to be the “Plaintiff”, and the “applicant” shall be deemed to be the “Defendant”, respectively. (2) Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act of the applicable provisions of this Act shall be deemed to be the “Defendant”).

3. A lawsuit for confirmation of partial rejection is acknowledged where obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means in removing the legal status of the plaintiff when the legal status of the plaintiff is unstable and dangerous, and a lawsuit for confirmation may be brought, despite the fact that filing a lawsuit for confirmation of confirmation is not a final solution of a dispute, and therefore there is no benefit in confirmation.

(2) The Plaintiff filed a claim for medical expenses against the Defendant on the premise that there is no cause attributable to the Plaintiff with respect to the treatment against the Defendant, and that there is no liability against the Defendant due to the instant accident that occurred during the process, and thus, it is difficult to deem that there is a benefit to seek confirmation that there is no liability arising from the instant accident, separate from the claim for performance.

In addition, the Defendant did not dispute the assertion on the existence of the above debt. As such, in relation to the existence of the Plaintiff’s debt against the Defendant due to the instant accident, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff’s legal status is unstable and dangerous.

Therefore, the part concerning the claim for confirmation of the existence of the obligation among the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as there is no benefit of confirmation.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제208조 제3항 제2호

참조판례

-대법원 2008. 7. 10. 선고 2005다41153 판결

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2015.08.18 2013가단7944

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.15 2014가단5348729

-의정부지방법원 2018.12.13 2017나214047

-광주지방법원 2018.04.27 2017나57522

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.07 2016가단5137329