beta
(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.02.05 2019가단118059

청구이의

Text

1. Ulsan District Court 2019 tea1074 against the Defendant’s Plaintiff is the executory order of the loans.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant against the Plaintiff at the Ulsan District Court on April 10, 2019 (referring to the Defendant);

For the purposes of this paragraph:

) A debtor (referring to the plaintiff) around December 2017, 2017;

For the purposes of this paragraph:

) From the end, the phrase “it is necessary to engage in the mining machine business.” On December 26, 2017, the obligor loaned KRW 49,500,000 to the obligor on December 26, 2017. As such, the obligor applied for a payment order which was the cause of the claim, subtracting KRW 4,825,00, which was repaid to the obligee as a repayment of the foregoing loan obligation, from the amount of KRW 44,675,00,000, which was repaid to the obligee as a repayment of the said loan obligation

B. On April 12, 2019, the Ulsan District Court issued a payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 44,675,000 won and 15% interest per annum from the day following the day on which the original copy of the instant payment order was served to the day of complete payment.” On May 4, 2019, the instant payment order was finalized.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On July 2017, the Plaintiff’s assertion 1 of the parties stated that “The Plaintiff shall invest in the mining machine business operated by the inland bitco C and raise profits therefrom.” They stated from the Defendant that “the Plaintiff shall invest in the bitco mining machine business,” and that “the Plaintiff may be deemed as losses in the event of investing money.”

Accordingly, the Defendant invested KRW 49,500,000 to the Plaintiff with the words “I will invest in the mining machine business,” and the Plaintiff transferred money to C which was engaged in the mining machine business that is a bitcoin with the said money, but incurred losses due to the decline in the value of virtual currency thereafter.

Nevertheless, the Defendant applied for the payment order as if it lent the above KRW 49,500,000 to the Plaintiff.