beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2019.08.22 2019가단2612

대여금

Text

1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 80,000,000 for the Plaintiff and 5% per annum from March 6, 2011 to March 8, 2019; and (b) from March 9, 2019.

Reasons

1. According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments set forth in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 (including paper numbers), the plaintiff may recognize the fact that the plaintiff lent KRW 80,000,000 to the defendant on September 6, 201, as the due date for payment on March 5, 2011.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from March 9, 2019 to May 31, 2019, calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from June 1, 2019 to the date of delivery of a copy of the instant complaint from March 6, 2011 to March 8, 2019, as stipulated by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

2. The defendant asserts that at the time 26,00,000 won was lent, and that there was no 80,000,000 won was lent.

However, unless it is acknowledged that the authenticity of a disposal document is acknowledged that there was an express or implied agreement different from the content of the document by reflect, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the expression of intent in accordance with the content of the document (see Supreme Court Decision 97Da1013, Jan. 21, 2000). The defendant stated that "8 million won is "8,000 won in the loan column of the loan certificate (Evidence A) prepared by the defendant at the time of the above loan." The defendant's seal is affixed to "8", and on September 6, 2010 on September 6, 2010, the date of the receipt of the loan certificate, the fact that the amount transferred from the account under the name of the plaintiff C to the defendant's account is 52,800,000 won.

The defendant's above assertion is rejected unless there is any counter-proof that there was an agreement different from the contents of the loan certificate, which is the above disposal document.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.