(영문) 광주고등법원 2015.01.23 2014나1941 | 리걸엔진

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) 광주고등법원 2015.01.23 2014나1941

대여금

Text

1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are all dismissed.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit, the appeal by the defendant.

Reasons

1. During the period from November 20, 2007 to April 26, 2008, the Plaintiff loaned a total of KRW 165 million to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant loan”) on eight occasions. The Defendant agreed to pay interest at the rate of 8% per month to the Plaintiff and to repay the said loan within the month from the date the Plaintiff demanded repayment.

However, even though the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to repay the instant loan, the Defendant did not pay the remainder of the loan with only a part of the loan repaid. Around June 4, 2008, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the Defendant on the charge of fraud of the loan borrowed, and the Defendant paid KRW 20 million to the Plaintiff on October 10, 2008 under investigation into the said charge.

After that, on May 11, 2009, the Defendant deposited the Plaintiff as the principal deposit in a criminal trial (29 million won as the name of the principal deposit on December 24, 2008).

On May 12, 2009, the defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of August 2 to be sentenced to a two-year imprisonment with prison labor for the defendant as a loan for a total of KRW 165 million from the plaintiff eight times between November 20, 2007 and April 26, 2008, by deceiving the plaintiff that the defendant would pay 8% interest per month in spite of no intent or ability to repay the money even if the defendant borrowed the money. The defendant received a total of KRW 165 million from the plaintiff during eight times during the period from November 20, 2007 to April 26, 2008.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant criminal judgment”). Although the prosecutor appealed on the ground of unreasonable sentencing (the Gwangju District Court 2009No1137) the prosecutor was sentenced to the dismissal on August 28, 2009, the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition - Evidence Nos. 8, Eul No. 1, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The plaintiff's assertion of the parties sought payment of KRW 96 million which the defendant did not repay among the loans in this case. Accordingly, the defendant on 207.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원목포지원 2014.04.24 2013가합1735

-부산지방법원 2015.07.16 2013가합12382

-대구지방법원서부지원 2015.08.18 2014가단29449

-청주지방법원 2018.05.11 2017가단100925

-서울남부지방법원 2016.03.31 2015나7966