beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasoning of this court’s acceptance of the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the first instance, except for the case where the defendant makes a decision on the additional argument in the trial as set forth below. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence
(However, the Defendant asserts that, on February 2, 198, the Plaintiff is exempted from employer liability due to gross negligence on the part of the first instance trial, which was separated and determined in the first instance trial (excluding the part on co-defendant B). The Defendant asserts that, in the absence of the Plaintiff’s licensed real estate agent B, there exists gross negligence, such as entering into the instant lease agreement as a broker, and failing to confirm whether B and G have legitimate authority to conclude the instant lease agreement, the employer liability should be exempted.
Even in cases where the illegal act of an employee appears to fall within the scope of external execution of administrative affairs, if the victim himself/herself knew, or was unable to know, due to gross negligence, that the act of the employee does not fall under the act of execution of administrative affairs by the supervisor of the relevant administrative affairs in lieu of the employer or the employer, the employer shall not be liable
In this case, the term "major negligence" refers to a situation in which it is deemed reasonable to deem that there is no need to protect the other party from the perspective of fairness that the other party to the transaction breached the duty of care required by the general public by believing that the other party to the transaction would not lawfully engage in the act within his/her authority, even though he/she could have known that the other party to the transaction would not have been able to do so within his/her authority.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da1327, Nov. 24, 2000). In the absence of a dispute, each entry of evidence Nos. 2, 4, 7, and 10, and the entire purport of the pleadings are as follows.