(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.08.23 2017나58579

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) 서울남부지방법원 2018.08.23 2017나58579

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. The reasons why the court of first instance should explain this case in this case are as follows: (a) the “N” of the first and sixth acts under the fifth of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be deemed as “M”; and (b) the Defendant’s assertion in the trial shall be deemed as the reasons why the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the court of first instance, except where the Defendant added the following judgments with regard to the matters claimed in the trial, thereby

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. The Defendant’s assertion (1) that the funds lent by the Plaintiff were embezzled and created by the Defendant, and there is no substance of the lending relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

Even if there is a lending contract, it is invalid because it constitutes a false expression of intention or a false declaration of conspiracy.

(2) By drawing up a written agreement (No. 2) with the Plaintiff’s agreement, the Plaintiff agreed to amend the loan agreement with interest of KRW 1.4 million and additional KRW 16.25 million and the remainder of the loan exempted.

B. (1) In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 4-1, F transferred KRW 190,90,000 to J on February 20, 2013, and the Plaintiff again transferred KRW 70,000,000 out of the said money to F on February 27, 2013.

However, on February 20, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that C was paid KRW 190,90,000,000 from F to the Defendant Company as the repayment amount. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff asserted that C or the Plaintiff embezzled the said money from the evidence submitted to C alone, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that C or the Plaintiff embezzled the said money from the evidence submitted to the effect that C or the Plaintiff embezzled the said money (including the serial number).

Therefore, this is applicable.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2015.12.09 2014가합18304

-서울고등법원 2017. 08. 16. 선고 2017누33413 판결

-대전지방법원홍성지원 2020.01.07 2019가합30270

-서울북부지방법원 2016.12.16 2016가단18859

-전주지방법원 2018.11.09 2017나14300