(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.12.01 2016나2838

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.12.01 2016나2838

대여금

Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion has a duty to pay each of the above loans to the Defendant, since the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 1.6 million to the Defendant during January 2008, KRW 5 million on September 23, 2009, and KRW 12 million on August 31, 2012, respectively.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion that the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 1.6 million to the Defendant during the period from January 2008 to March 2008, it is insufficient to recognize the Plaintiff’s assertion on the ground that the health account statement No. 1, corresponding thereto, is only a document prepared by the Plaintiff.

However, according to the statement No. 2-1 of the evidence No. 2, the plaintiff's bank account as the defendant's bank account, 50,000 won on January 28, 2008, and the same year

2. 26.550,00 won, and the same year.

3. The fact that each remittance of KRW 550,00 is recognized, but the defendant argued that each of the above money was remitted not to the money borrowed from the plaintiff but to the money sold to the plaintiff. The above remittance alone is insufficient to recognize that the total amount of KRW 1.6 million was remitted to the defendant as a loan to the defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Rather, according to the evidence Nos. 11 and 14, the defendant lent 3 million won to the plaintiff on June 30, 2009, which was after the date of the above transfer of the plaintiff, after the date of the above transfer, and thereafter, the plaintiff lent 1 million won to the defendant on July 28, 2009.

9. The repayment of KRW 1.6 million and KRW 3 million on October 22, 23 of the same year is recognized. If the Plaintiff had a loan claim of KRW 1.6 million against the Defendant, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant a full amount of KRW 3 million, despite the fact that the Plaintiff paid the remainder of the loan claim of KRW 1.6 million upon offsetting the loan claim of KRW 3 million borrowed from the Defendant, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant a full amount of KRW 1.6 million, which is likely to have not been a loan.

B. Determination as to the assertion on loans worth five million won.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2019.09.05 2019나50036

-수원지방법원 2015.03.20 2014가단33327

-서울북부지방법원 2015.05.28 2014가단48573

-광주지방법원 2018.02.14 2017나2355

-서울고등법원 2015.05.14 2014나56494