(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.05.25 2017나2061837

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 2018.05.25 2017나2061837

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is 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. We cannot accept the Plaintiff’s assertion on the same ground as the judgment of the court of first instance on the sole basis of evidence submitted in the court of first instance or evidence additionally submitted in the trial.

① There is no specific arrangement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and ② a transcript (Evidence A4) alone is insufficient to deem that there was an arrangement as alleged by the Plaintiff (including a reimbursement agreement). ③ Even if there was a finite relationship between the parties regarding “F land”, in light of the content of the recording or the Defendant’s state at the time of the recording, and the circumstances where the Plaintiff’s provisional seizure on the real estate owned by the Defendant, etc., it is difficult to deem that the Defendant expressed the intent to transfer the ownership of the said land in a conclusive manner. ④ In light of the fact that the Defendant remitted the Plaintiff KRW 7 million to the Plaintiff, the circumstance that the Defendant remitted the money to the Plaintiff, and the content of the conversation that the Defendant divided with the Plaintiff, it is difficult to deem that the Defendant wired the said money with the intent to waive

The reasoning for this Court to be stated in this case is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except as follows. Thus, it is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The second 10th "24 times" shall be read as "25 times", "153,00,000" as "154,000,000."

" August 16, 2016" in the third first sentence shall be changed to " August 17, 2016".

The third third step is "153,00,000 won" to "154,00,000 won".

Part IV from the fourth to the eighth shall be deleted.

The fourth 20th "No. 7" in the fourth 20th shall be understood as "No. 7 and 8."

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case should be dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion.

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2014.11.19 2014누53126

-대구고등법원 2015.10.16 2014누6563

-서울고등법원 2018.03.30 2017나2059957

-인천지방법원 2020.02.13 2019가합51153