logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.04.25 2017가합103304
대여금
Text

1. The Defendant’s each of the Plaintiffs’ KRW 170,000,000, as well as 5% per annum from December 21, 2016 to May 22, 2017.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs are children of D, and the Defendant was in a relationship with D since 2010.

D In December 20, 2016, the Plaintiffs were left as co-inheritors and died.

B. D remitted total of KRW 100,000,000 to the Defendant on June 1, 2010, and KRW 30,000,000 on June 17, 2010, and KRW 20,000,000 on November 16, 2010, and KRW 30,000,000 on November 26, 2010.

C. From April 1, 2011, the Defendant operated the instant household store with the trade name “E” (hereinafter “instant household store”).

D paid KRW 120,00,000 to a lessor on February 30, 2011 with respect to the operation of the instant furniture, and paid KRW 249,50,000 in total to a lessee during the period from January 14, 201 to March 2, 2011. ③ From February 25, 2011 to March 29, 2011, the Plaintiff paid KRW 120,000 in total to a construction business operator, and ④ from March 30, 201 to July 30, 2011, the Plaintiff paid KRW 44,000 in total to a lessor.

D As such, the Defendant paid a total of KRW 53,500,000 on behalf of the Defendant for expenses incurred in establishing and operating the instant furniture.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-3, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiffs 1) D loaned KRW 100,000,000 to the Defendant from June 1, 2010 to November 26, 2010. As such, the Defendant is obligated to return it to the Plaintiffs, who are heirs of D. (2) Since D loaned or invested KRW 53,500,000 in the manner that the Defendant pays for the expenses incurred in establishing and operating the instant furniture on behalf of the Defendant, it is obligated that the Defendant return it to the Plaintiffs.

B. Defendant D did not lend money to the Defendant, but donated to the Defendant with a relationship of interest.

Even if the above money is considered as investment money, the current operation of the household store of this case is in a state of deficit and is distributed.

arrow