logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.12 2014가단260046
대여금
Text

1. Defendant D’s KRW 31,948,749 and KRW 23,986,244 among them shall be from March 11, 2005 to October 12, 2016.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that Defendant C lent each of them to Defendant C with KRW 16 million around August 1990 (hereinafter “the first loan”) and KRW 44 million on December 16, 1991 (hereinafter “the second loan”).

Defendant C is liable to repay the remainder of KRW 42 million as it paid only 18 million out of the above money until the end of October 2005, and Defendant B is jointly and severally liable on the basis of the daily cost of death.

B. Defendant C’s assertion that the Defendants borrowed KRW 44 million from the Plaintiff was not for the purchase and repair of housing, but the purpose of the loan was not for the purchase and repair of housing. On April 22, 1996, KRW 10 million on November 20, 1996, KRW 10 million on or before March 3, 2005, and KRW 8 million on or after March 2005, the above loan was extinguished by the repayment. Even if not, the instant lawsuit was filed after December 31, 2002, which was the date on which the second loan was due, and the second credit was extinguished by the statute of limitations.

The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on October 30, 2014, which was from March 10, 2005 to September 30, 2014, which was the final repayment date of Defendant C, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim is not permissible as an abuse of rights that violates the principle of trust and good faith by exercising rights in violation of the principle of forfeiture or invalidation.

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

A. The plaintiff alleged that he lent 16 million won to Defendant C as a house purchase fund around August 1990, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this. The plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

B. Decision 1 on the second loan 1) The Plaintiff is the second loan 4 million won on December 16, 1991 to Defendant C (hereinafter “the second loan”).

B The fact that the repayment was made until December 1992 by the due date is no dispute between the parties.

Defendant C shall pay to the Plaintiff the borrowed amount of KRW 44 million and the due date.

arrow