logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2019.08.23 2018가합101072
청구이의
Text

1. The defendant (Counterclaim defendant) B and the notary public against A are the law firm F on September 7, 2007.

Reasons

1. Order of determination

A. On February 16, 2006, the Defendants asserted that they lent KRW 300,000,000 to Plaintiff B and A around February 16, 2006, and on a counterclaim, they sought payment of the said money and damages for delay to the said Plaintiffs. 2) ① The Defendants asserted that Plaintiff B and A loaned KRW 300,000,000 from May 21, 2006 to August 25, 2006, respectively, from August 25, 2006 to September 6, 2006, and set up a notarial deed of KRW 140,000,000,000 from August 25, 2006 to September 1385, 205, the Defendants asserted that the above Plaintiffs were liable for compulsory execution and the damages for delay against the said money were all asserted by Plaintiff B and A as the counterclaim.

3. ① The Defendants asserted that around August 25, 2006 lent KRW 70,00,000 to Plaintiff A and C and drafted a 823 notarial deed in relation thereto, and as a counterclaim, they claim against the above Plaintiffs the amount of KRW 15,00,000 out of the above loans and damages for delay thereof. ② Plaintiff A and C claimed that all obligations under the 823 notarial deed were extinguished, and they sought non-permission of compulsory execution.

B. On the top of the order of determination, the above time order without classifying the main claim and the counterclaim

(a) make decisions in order of paragraphs (i) through (iii);

2. Determination on the loan of KRW 300,000 on February 16, 2006

(a) a determination on the cause of this part of the counterclaims 1), Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, and Eul evidence Nos. 2, 5, 6, and 12 (including a branch number, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply);

(A) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the Defendants comprehensively based on the overall purport of the pleadings, the Defendants leased KRW 300,000 to Plaintiff B by setting the interest rate of KRW 5% on February 16, 2006 and on June 21, 2006, and the Plaintiff A guaranteed the above obligation on February 24, 2006. (A) This Court Decision 2012Ga6779 decided Oct. 22, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the “relevant case”).

arrow