logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.02.04 2015나306239
대여금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is between the defendant's birth-friendly relationship with the defendant, and the defendant is a business operator of "C" located in Daegu Northern-gu D.

B. Upon receipt of a request from E to lend C’s operating capital, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 5,00,000,000, in total, to the deposit account in the Defendant’s name and KRW 35,000,000 (hereinafter “the instant loan”) on October 2, 2013.

【Ground for recognition】 A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 3 in the evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. 1) The Plaintiff transferred the instant loan to the Defendant’s deposit account in the name of the Defendant, a business account, at the request of the Plaintiff E, who was employed as the employee of the Plaintiff C, and the said loan was used as the operational fund of the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the instant loan to the Plaintiff as the representative of C. 2) The Defendant is the actual operator of the Defendant, and the Defendant was not involved in the operation or operation of C, and was not only lent the instant loan to E in the name of business registration, and there was no fact from the Plaintiff.

(b) A person who has permitted another person to run his/her business using his/her name shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the third party who has transacted with him/her misleading that person as the proprietor of the business.

(Article 24 of the Commercial Act). Even if the defendant did not actually participate in the operation of C as alleged by the defendant, it is reasonable to view that the defendant allowed E to operate C by using the defendant's name, and that the plaintiff as the plaintiff was erroneous as the business owner of C, thereby lending the loan of this case.

Therefore, the Defendant, as the nominal name holder, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 55,00,000 as well as the delay damages calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from May 30, 2015 to the date of full payment after the delivery of the copy of the instant complaint.

arrow