logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.01.28 2014나6859
대여금
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 20, 2009, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 300 million to the Defendant’s account in the name of F in the name of the Defendant, at the request of the Defendant’s East C (the Deceased).

B. The Deceased died on October 20, 2010.

C. From November 2, 2010 to December 28, 2012, the Defendant paid a total of KRW 250 million to the Plaintiff.

(In fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 1, 5, 9, Eul's evidence 1, witness E's testimony and purport of whole pleading)

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff is the defendant's deceased person or his representative, through the deceased, 30 million won (hereinafter the loan in this case).

(2) The Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the loan to the Plaintiff as the Plaintiff paid only KRW 250 million among them. (2) Even if the Defendant did not participate in the instant monetary loan agreement and the Deceased concluded the instant monetary loan loan agreement on behalf of the Defendant without authority, the Defendant ratified the Plaintiff’s act of non-authorized representation, such as repayment of the instant loan after the Deceased left the world, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the loan to the Plaintiff and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the loan of this case was lent to the deceased, and the Defendant, who left the deceased’s world, was merely liable for the Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’s Do’ as the father who actually used the loan of this case.

3. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances as to whether the deceased was the deceased or his/her agent, the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 10, and the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 10, and the witness E’s testimony and pleading, the debtor of the instant monetary loan agreement appears to be the deceased, and the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is alone.

arrow