(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2020.01.31 2019나1171

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 2020.01.31 2019나1171

대여금

Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s omission of the deceased C (Death on July 17, 2017, hereinafter “the deceased”). D is the Plaintiff’s wife.

B. On October 25, 2004, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 5,000,00 to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant, which caused the Plaintiff’s claim, was aware of the Plaintiff’s birth and the E market. On October 25, 2004, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 5,000,000 to the Defendant on August 24, 2017 at the agreed interest rate of 1.25% (payment on the last day of each month) per month, and the due date of payment on August 24, 2017.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to repay to the plaintiff.

B. The defendant asserted that he was not the plaintiff but borrowed KRW 5,000,000 from the plaintiff's her birth, who was the plaintiff's birth, and the deceased was engaged in monetary transactions with the defendant with the account under the name of the plaintiff or the plaintiff's wife to receive benefits as a basic recipient.

Accordingly, upon the request of the deceased, the Defendant remitted interest from March 2, 2005 to July 2009 to the Plaintiff’s wife account. From August 2, 2009 to October 10, 2016 to the Plaintiff’s wife account.

Since then, the Defendant transferred the principal amount of KRW 5,000,000 on October 16, 2016 to the Plaintiff’s wife account, thereby repaying all loans of KRW 5,00,000 to the Deceased.

3. The plaintiff asserts that the decision on the cause of the claim was not directly known to the plaintiff and the defendant but remitted money upon the deceased's request. In light of the fact that the defendant, not the plaintiff, was arguing that the plaintiff borrowed money from the deceased's her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her she

Therefore, we cannot accept the Plaintiff’s argument on the ground of claim.

4. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is this.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2020.01.31 2019나1171

-대전지방법원홍성지원 2015.10.07 2015가단2263

-의정부지방법원 2020.09.10 2019나5162

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.06.15 2017가합74729

-전주지방법원군산지원 2015.03.27 2014가단1527