2020Na2018888 Action for a Penalty

A Stock Company

Law Firm LLC (LLC)

Attorney Kim Jong-dong

B A.

Attorney Shin Young-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul Western District Court Decision 2019Kahap39386 Decided June 10, 2020

2020, 10,30

November 27, 2020

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 33,520,225 won with 5% interest per annum from March 31, 2016 until the delivery date of a copy of the application for amendment of the claim of this case, and 12% interest per annum from the following day to the day of complete payment.

1. Quotation of the first instance judgment

This court's reasoning is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following parts written or added. Thus, this court's reasoning is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(In addition to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court of first instance, the fact-finding and decision of the court of first instance is justifiable in view of the evidence submitted by the plaintiff in this court, and there is no error as alleged in the ground for appeal by the plaintiff

○○ The reasons for the judgment of the first instance court are as follows: “A (Plaintiff)” shall be written by adding “A (Plaintiff)” to “A (Plaintiff).”

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows from the nineth to the last half (from the nineth to the last half after the second half below) below below the list of the first instance court's reasons in paragraph (c).

Article 17 Special Agreement provides for a separate special agreement if any change or addition is made by agreement between A (Plaintiff) and B (Defendant) such as the provision of sales authority for the repayment of claims and termination of sales authority, and includes this Agreement. 5,348 of the first order quantity and 3,152 of the second order quantity and 8,500 of the second order quantity are replaced by the quantity (asset security) possessed by the non-party company (asset security), and for this purpose, B (Defendant) provides the non-party company (Plaintiff) with the exclusive authority for the supply and sale of goods (products) from the time when A (Plaintiff) pays the first payment to the non-party company.

2. The defendant Eul (the defendant) shall pay the non-party company's claims against the non-party company's securitization assets (the cleaning of this case) and supplies the non-party company's products (products) to Gap (the plaintiff of this case) at the same time.3. Eul (the defendant) shall cancel the right to sell the non-party company's securitization assets (the cleaning of this case of this case) and provide Gap (the plaintiff of this case) with the exclusive right to sell and distribute the securitization assets (the cleaning of this case of this case) at the same time.4. Eul (the defendant of this case) shall put 5,348 first product payments (50,000,000) into the place of the plaintiff (the plaintiff) at the same time. 5. Eul (the defendant of this case) shall pay the debt (8,500,300,000,000 won) secured by the quantity from the third party, and shall recognize the remaining ownership of the non-party company Gap (the plaintiff of this case).

○ The reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance in Article 3-2 (1) of the Reasons for the Judgment of the court of first instance. (2) "In this court," "in the first instance court," "in the first instance court."

○ This is true in light of the fact that the non-party company held 67 cleaning machines of this case as follows: (1) 3-2 and 3-4th below (6th) and 4th below, the reason for the judgment of the court of first instance added: (2) and (3).

2. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Judgment of the presiding judge;

Judges Laos

Judges Lee Jae-at