(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.05.25 2016가단138610

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) 서울동부지방법원 2018.05.25 2016가단138610

대여금

Text

1. Defendant C shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 65,00,000 and 15% per annum from October 29, 2016 to the date of Down payment.

Reasons

1. In full view of the facts of recognition as evidence No. 1 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Defendants may recognize that on December 20, 2005, the Plaintiff issued promissory notes with the Plaintiff’s face value of KRW 65,000,000, issue date of December 20, 2005, and the payment place, place of payment, Incheon, and due date of payment at sight, and the payee’s issuance of promissory notes with the Plaintiff as the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant promissory notes”).

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff loaned KRW 100 million to Defendant B in around 2004, and set up two collateral mortgages on the real estate located in Incheon Nam-gu, Incheon, which is owned by Defendant B, but thereafter, Defendant B requested cancellation of the collateral, issued the Promissory Notes in this case, instead of cancelling the collateral, to pay KRW 65,00,000 jointly and severally with Defendant C, so the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 65,00,000 and the delay damages therefor. (2) The Defendants’ assertion that the Defendants asserted that the Defendants were liable to jointly purchase the real estate located in Incheon Nam-gu, and jointly transferred the ownership of the real estate under Defendant B’s name. At the time, Defendant C borrowed money from the Plaintiff, and set up the collateral on the said real estate to secure the repayment of the loan.

After December 2005, the Defendants sold the above real estate and cancelled the mortgage established by the Plaintiff. At the Plaintiff’s request, Defendant C issued a promissory note regarding the remaining loan amount of KRW 65,000,000,000. Since Defendant C had already paid KRW 65,000 at the face value of the above promissory note until the end of 2005 in the process of a large number of monetary transactions with the Plaintiff, Defendant C did not have any obligation of KRW 65,00,000, and even if not, Defendant C had already extinguished the prescription.

Defendant B did not borrow money from the Plaintiff, even if so.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2015.09.22 2014가합2974

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.01 2014가단5221213

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.11.25 2020가합555285

-수원지방법원안산지원 2020.01.22 2019가단65989