logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.30 2016가단5303812
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff established and operated the Plaintiff Company C (hereinafter “C”), and the Defendant was admitted to C by the Plaintiff and served in C from January 2012.

In April 2014, the retired person is the person who retired.

B. Around December 2010, the Defendant became aware of the Plaintiff while becoming a member of the D Company (Seoul Jongno-gu E) in which the Plaintiff was employed. At the time, the Plaintiff actively expressed the Defendant in the state of her wife and 2 children, and the Defendant actively provided the Defendant with a teaching system from early 201 to early 201, and repeated the Plaintiff’s hedging with the Plaintiff from early 2016 until early 2016.

C. Around December 21, 2011, the Defendant leased an officetel located in the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office (hereinafter “instant officetel”) in the name of the Defendant around January 21, 201 and moved into the instant officetel in the name of the Defendant around 80 million won, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 50 million out of the deposit.

(A) Around December 21, 201, the Plaintiff withdrawn the down payment of KRW 1 million, and KRW 7 million on December 27, 2011, and paid the Defendant the remainder to the Defendant, and the remainder was transferred directly to the lessor by adding the Plaintiff KRW 42 million, which the Defendant transferred to the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff).

On May 20, 2015, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant the word “the Plaintiff may lend money more than 5,000 won.” On October 6, 2015, the Defendant sent to the Defendant the word “I need not go to go to the end of May.” The Defendant sent to the Defendant the word “I may lend money only KRW 10,000,000,000 to the Defendant.”

E. On the other hand, the Defendant, while leaving the instant officetel around February 2016, received 80 million won from the lessor as the lease deposit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, 4, 5 and Eul evidence Nos. 6, 17, and 20, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff alleged by the parties concerned is 50 million won out of the lease deposit of this case to the defendant.

arrow