logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.31 2017나89355
대여금
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. In around 2005, Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant”) borrowed KRW 20,000,00 (hereinafter “the instant loan”) from D without fixing the due date, while working for the entertainment tavern “E” operated by D (hereinafter “instant main shop”). The Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s obligation to refund the said loan to D.

B. As the Defendant did not repay the instant loan, around 2006, the Plaintiff subrogated to D for KRW 20,000,000 in total, including KRW 19,000,000 received from the Defendant’s mother, and its amount of KRW 19,00,000.

[Ground of recognition] Each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including each number) and the purport of the entire pleadings [the defendant asserts that "site Nos. 1-1 and No. 2 (Promise Bill)" is "site" on the date of the first pleading in the court of first instance. However, even in cases where a person who raised a documentary evidence that the parties dispute as a site did not prove his/her establishment especially, the court may recognize the establishment of the documentary evidence with free will by taking into account the overall purport of the pleadings, instead of other evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Da12070, Apr. 13, 1993). The above documentary loan certificate and promissory note contain the copy of the defendant's driver's license, the amount borrowed, the defendant's name, resident registration number, and address, and the amount and unmanned name are stated, and in light of the fact that the defendant does not dispute against the unmanned, it can be sufficiently recognized as evidence No. 1-2, No. 1-2].

2. According to the above facts of determination, the defendant, as the principal obligor of the loan of this case, is a joint and several surety, and the plaintiff, who subrogated for 19,00,000 won out of the loan of this case, is the above 19,00,000 won and the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case as sought by the plaintiff after the date of subrogation.

arrow