(영문) 춘천지방법원 2015.07.08 2015가단1584

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) 춘천지방법원 2015.07.08 2015가단1584

청구이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in accordance with Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence No. 3-1, and Eul evidence No. 3-2, as a whole.

D, the husband of the Plaintiff, is engaged in laundry business with the trade name of “E”, and the Defendant sells laundry machines and laundry materials, etc.

B. D purchased laundry Machinery from the Defendant, and was not paid the purchase price and credit transaction price for laundry Machinery to the Defendant.

C. On May 20, 2012, the Plaintiff prepared a notarial deed stating that the loan amount is KRW 21 million, the due date for repayment is June 20, 2013, and the agreed interest rate is zero percent per annum, and the overdue interest rate is thirty percent per annum, and issued it to the Defendant. D.

The Plaintiff failed to repay the debt based on the No. 1 No. 1 notarial deed of this case until June 20, 2013.

E. The Defendant filed an application for a compulsory auction with the Chuncheon District Court F for a compulsory auction on the real estate listed in the attached list in the Plaintiff’s name (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the title of execution of the No. 1 Deed as the title of execution.

F. Accordingly, the Plaintiff and D visited the Defendant to withdraw the above compulsory auction procedure.

G. On March 13, 2014, D made a notarial deed stating that the amount of loan shall be KRW 27 million and KRW 10 million by means of repayment shall be repaid until May 13, 2014; and KRW 17 million shall be repaid until October 13, 2014; however, D made a notarial deed stating that the amount of delayed interest shall be at least 30% per annum and borrowed from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) and issued it to the Defendant.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) The plaintiff alleged as to the non-existence of the notarial deed No. 1 of this case. The debt based on the notarial deed No. 1 of this case is the price for the laundry machine purchased by the defendant. The defendant recovered for the repair of the laundry machine and sold it to a third party.

유사 판례

-제주지방법원 2016.10.04 2015가단13743

-부산지방법원 2014.12.05 2014나42162

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.02.10 2013가단314151

-의정부지방법원 2015.04.07 2014가단38067

-수원지방법원 2018.08.28 2018나51430