logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.05.29 2013가단16436
차용금
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. The Defendants deliver the 2nd floor of 66.78 square meters among the buildings listed in the attached list;

(b) from April 17, 2013.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 27, 2006, the Plaintiff leased to B (the husband of Defendant C) the part of the second floor among the buildings listed in the attached Table No. 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 650,000, and the lease term of July 26, 2008.

B. On August 22, 2006, the Plaintiff lent 10,000,000 won to Defendant C and the deceased B as interest rate of 1.5% per month. The Plaintiff agreed to receive 80,000,000 won per month by adding the monthly interest of 1.50,000 won and the monthly rent of 6.50,000 won, and to receive only the principal and interest for Defendant C.

C. On January 9, 2008, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 10 million to Defendant C and the network B at 2% of interest per month. Since the funds were borrowed from F, the Plaintiff’s seat, Defendant C agreed to pay KRW 200,000 per month to the Plaintiff or F.

On June 4, 2007, the Plaintiff respectively lent KRW 3,000,000 to Defendant C and the network, and KRW 5,000,000 to September 28, 2007.

E. The Defendants were 705,360 won in an accurate amount of 705,300 won in water supply tax from 2010 to 2013 (Article 705,360 won in water supply tax) (Article 9 of the amendment of the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim as of April 17, 2013, and the Plaintiff reduced to KRW 705,300 in amending the purport of the claim.

In August 23, 2013, the purport of the claim and the amendment of the cause of the claim are unpaid.

F. (i) The Plaintiff was paid 13% interest on the loan of KRW 10,000,000 on January 9, 2008 until February 8, 2009.

The Plaintiff, while having received interest 13 times (the preparatory document dated April 17, 2013) and changed the above assertion that only 12 times had been received thereafter. There is no evidence to acknowledge that the confession was contrary to the truth and due to mistake, and thus, the argument reversed cannot be recognized.

D. The Defendant C, the net B, at the time of delinquency of the interest of KRW 650,000 and KRW 150,000 per month to be paid to the Plaintiff, was drawn up with a loan certificate. However, Gap evidence 5-3 through 6, 8 through 11, 15, 16.

arrow