beta
(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.07.02 2014가단33040

양수금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay 24,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 20% per annum from August 27, 2014 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C works as an employee in the restaurant operated by the Defendant, and D was living together with the Defendant.

B. C B. On April 30, 2012, the portion of wages of 24 million won (3 million won) shall be paid in full between May and June 2012, and 21 million won shall be paid in installments on the 15th day of each month during the period from July 2012 to 21 months: Provided, That in the event of a breach of the agreement, the payment note stating that “the full amount of the balance shall be paid in lump sum and no objection shall be raised,” is referred to as “the instant agreement.”

(C) The agreement of this case contains the name and the seal of the defendant in addition to the signature and the seal of D as the debtor. D. The plaintiff was assigned KRW 24 million to the defendant under the agreement of this case from C on August 19, 2014, and C sent a notice on the same day to the defendant and the above notice reached the defendant. E. Meanwhile, D did not fully perform its obligation under the agreement of this case to the plaintiff or C. [the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, each of the entries in subparagraphs 1 through 3, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion expressed that the Defendant bears the obligation stipulated in the instant agreement together with D, insofar as the Defendant signed and sealed the instant agreement, so that the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 24 million and its delay damages based on the instant agreement.

B. Although the summary of the defendant's assertion is a fact that the defendant stated his name in the instant agreement, the defendant does not express his/her intent that he/she bears the obligation under the instant agreement.

C. If the objective meaning of the language and text is clear when the parties to the judgment prepare in writing a certain contract as a disposal document, the existence and content of the expression should be recognized as stated in the language and text, barring any special circumstances; and