logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.07.15 2019나65262
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. Basic facts

A. On March 15, 2010, C borrowed KRW 40,000,00 from the Plaintiff, and prepared and delivered the loan certificate as follows (hereinafter “the first loan certificate”) to the Plaintiff. On December 28, 2011, C signed on the lower end of the first loan certificate.

CD E A C A B

B. On December 27, 2014, the Defendant drafted a certificate of fact (hereinafter “certificate 1”) with the Plaintiff as follows:

B I AF B A E H

C. On April 11, 2017, the Defendant prepared a loan certificate (hereinafter “second loan certificate”) and a fact-finding certificate (hereinafter “second certificate”) with the Plaintiff as follows.

No. 2 Certificate 2 E H C B B [Grounds for Recognition] without dispute, each entry in the evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Upon the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff claimed that KRW 40,000,000 was lent to C as of June 30, 2010, and 3% of the delayed damage rate.

Although the Defendant promised to repay the above amount to the Plaintiff, the Defendant did not pay it up to the present day. Accordingly, the Defendant’s claim against the Defendant for payment of KRW 40,000,000 and damages for delay at the rate of 25% per annum of the maximum interest rate stipulated in the Interest Limitation Act from July 1, 2010 to the agreed rate of damages following the due date.

B. A person who borrowed money from the Plaintiff’s assertion is C, and the Defendant has no relation thereto.

On December 28, 2011, the Plaintiff threatened the Defendant to the effect that the Defendant did not sign on the first loan certificate, but died of the Defendant’s denial and the Plaintiff’s death.

The defendant was signed by the plaintiff's duress at the bottom of the first loan certificate, and it was not a signature to guarantee C's loan obligations, and there is no validity of the signature of the first loan certificate drawn up by the plaintiff's duress.

The first written confirmation is only that “C receives money from the Plaintiff and pays the interior cost and salary to the Defendant, and the Defendant has paid it.”

arrow