beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2018.07.13 2017가단23179

대여금

Text

1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 85,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from December 30, 2017 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of premise;

A. From the E account, from March 22, 2016 to August 5, 2016, the sum of KRW 61,000,000 was transferred to the Defendant C’s account; KRW 9,000,000 was transferred to the Defendant D’s account on May 26, 2016; and KRW 15,00,000 was transferred from the F’s account to the Defendant D’s account on June 13, 2016.

B. E is the Plaintiff’s children, Defendant C, and D are the children of Defendant B, and F is the Plaintiff’s children.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 2 evidence (including more than one number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Defendant B asserted that Defendant B borrowed KRW 85,00,000 by means of the account transfer on the premise that Defendant B did not repay the loan for a reasonable period of time despite Defendant B’s request for the repayment of the loan, while Defendant B acknowledged the fact that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 85,00,000 from the account transfer on the premise that the loan was made, but there is no evidence to prove the above fact that the loan was repaid.

Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from December 30, 2017 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case filed by the Plaintiff.

B. The Plaintiff asserted that Defendant C and D agreed to pay the borrowed debt jointly with Defendant C and D. However, Defendant C and D denied this, and Defendant C and D denied this. In the premise, the instant account transfer statement alone, on the premise of the fact, led Defendant C and D to assume joint and several obligations.

It is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff borrowed or borrowed from the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence, and this part of the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is accepted as reasonable, and the plaintiff's claim against the defendant C and D is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.