logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.08.25 2015가단48509
대여금반환 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion is that the defendant would acquire multiple licenses from both banks and the plaintiff, on the ground that he himself is the intention to acquire multiple licenses, and the defendant would have borrowed money from the plaintiff by requesting the plaintiff to lend the acquisition price of the facilities and medical devices as follows. However, the fact that the defendant did not accept D's complaint but belonged to the plaintiff.

- On June 25, 2013 and June 26, 2013, the Plaintiff’s husband E’s transfer of KRW 20 million in total from the Defendant’s account to the Defendant’s account on July 11, 2013 - cash payment of KRW 20 million to the Defendant’s Director F at the Defendant’s request on September 16, 2013 - the Defendant’s deposit of KRW 6.5 million with the Defendant’s account on September 16, 2013, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 46.5 million in total and its delay damages.

(2) On June 25, 2013, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 20 million in total from the Defendant’s husband E account to the Defendant’s account on June 25, 2013, and on September 16, 2013, deposited KRW 6.5 million in the F’s account on September 16, 2013.

However, it is not sufficient to recognize that each of the above amounts was paid KRW 20 million to F at the request of the defendant, and there is no other evidence, in addition, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff paid KRW 20 million to F at the request of the defendant.

Therefore, we cannot accept all the plaintiff's argument.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.

arrow