logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.09.02 2016재나20
물품대금
Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant, and Plaintiff for retrial).

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff, which became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, filed a lawsuit claiming the purchase of goods against the Defendant as Seoul Western District Court Decision 2014 Ghana17692. Accordingly, the Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming the purchase of goods against the Plaintiff as a counterclaim by the same court. The Plaintiff’s claim is dismissed in the lawsuit, and the Defendant partially accepted the Defendant’s counterclaim, and it is evident that “the Plaintiff shall pay 6% per annum from July 30, 2014 to January 13, 2015; and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment; and that the Plaintiff shall pay 2015Na30682 (the main lawsuit); 2015Na3069 (the main lawsuit); and that the Plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed as the Plaintiff’s counterclaim; and that it is evident that the Plaintiff’s remaining final and conclusive on August 21, 2015 and the Plaintiff’s remaining final and conclusive on May 27, 2015 (the first appeal).

2. Plaintiff’s assertion and determination on the grounds for retrial

A. Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “Nos. 1, 2, and 8 of the evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, and 8, which serve as the basis for the Plaintiff’s argument for a retrial, constitutes grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)

B. In light of the above, Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “A retrial may be instituted only when a judgment of conviction or a judgment of a fine for negligence has become final and conclusive or a final and conclusive judgment of a conviction or a fine for negligence cannot be rendered for reasons other than lack of evidence in the case of paragraph (1) 4 through 7,” and Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “The requirements of Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act are to prevent the harmful effects of the remaining lawsuit, and Article 451(1)4 through 7 of the

arrow