logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2018.02.07 2017나13142
손해배상(기)
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

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

Reasons

1. The grounds for admitting the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case are as follows, except for the modification of part of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows, and thus, the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the corresponding part among the original defendants. Thus, the relevant part is cited pursuant to the main sentence

2. If the plaintiff purchased the extraction right of this case without delay as if it were possible to extract it, the defendant Eul, a director of the defendant company, at the time of the conclusion of the contract of this case, sells the extraction right of this case to F and C as the execution of duties of the defendant company, and as mentioned above, the defendant Eul committed a tort in relation to the sale of the extraction right of this case. Thus, the defendant company is liable to compensate the above damages suffered by the plaintiffs in collaboration with the defendant Eul pursuant to Article 35 (1) of the Civil Code. The defendant company added the following contents between the 6th and 10th, the 6th, the 9th and 10th, the 5th, the 5th, the 5th, the 5th and the 111th inserted "the purchase of the extraction right of this case," and the 3th, the 5th, F or K, and the 3th, the 7th, the 7th of the 7th, which were alleged by the plaintiffs.

However, a mining right holder whose address has been changed.

arrow