(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.05.14 2014가합34157

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) 창원지방법원 2015.05.14 2014가합34157

대여금

Text

1. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed to the Plaintiff KRW 388,500,000 and Defendant A with respect thereto from January 9, 2015, and Defendant B.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that aims at the distribution business of steel materials, the distribution business of resources (such as scrap metal, scrap metal, etc.), the distribution business of construction materials, etc., and the Defendant A is an individual who engages in the distribution business of steel materials, scrap metal, base metal, etc.

B. On February 14, 2014, the Plaintiff agreed to lend KRW 388,500,000 to Defendant A (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) as follows.

① Defendant A shall have the Plaintiff enter not less than 1,000 tons of monthly scrap metal, etc.

C. Defendant B and C agreed to guarantee Defendant A’s obligation under the instant loan agreement jointly and severally.

Defendant A did not comply with the terms and conditions under the instant loan agreement.

【Defendant A’s ground for recognition: A’s non-contentious facts, Gap’s evidence 1 [Attachment A’s assertion to the effect that the authenticity of the above loan certificate is denied, but Gap’s evidence 2 (including the paper number; hereinafter the same shall apply) is alleged to the effect that the said loan certificate

In addition to the whole purport of the pleading, the authenticity of its formation shall be recognized), and as to Defendant B and C, the purport of the whole statement and pleading of evidence No. 2

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 388,500,000 and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from September 27, 2014, the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint, to December 30, 2014, the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint, Defendant B, and Defendant C, from September 27, 2014 to the day of full payment.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-대구지방법원서부지원 2016.01.15 2015가합1643

-수원지방법원성남지원 2016.09.28 2016가단11300

-인천지방법원 2017.12.14 2017가단22079

-청주지방법원충주지원 2015.03.26 2014가단7752

-부산지방법원 2015.02.13 2014가합42625