(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.07.13 2015나306611

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) 대구지방법원 2016.07.13 2015나306611

채무부존재확인

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance is applicable.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C agreed to register the business name of the instant business office in the name of the Plaintiff, the father of C, between D and D, the actual operator of the Defendant (formerly: Dong Branch Co., Ltd.) B (hereinafter “instant business office”).

B. On January 10, 2013, C and D, pursuant to the above agreement, indicated the Plaintiff’s name, resident registration number, address, etc. and affixed the Plaintiff’s seal on an consignment contract (hereinafter “instant consignment contract”) and F (the name of the former business operator of the instant business establishment) with the content that the Plaintiff is entrusted by the Defendant with the business of transporting alternative cargo, etc. to the entire North Korea E (hereinafter “instant consignment contract”).

C. At the time of signing and sealing the seal, the amount of the instant transfer/acquisition agreement was blank, but D subsequently stated “YYYYYYYY 16,313,836” in the said amount column.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 7, Gap evidence 8-8, 9, 10, 11, Eul evidence 1, 3, 4, and 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff did not prepare or agree to prepare the entrustment contract and the transfer/acquisition agreement of the instant case, and C and D prepared it by stealing the Plaintiff’s name. As such, the Plaintiff did not bear the Defendant’s obligation to pay the outstanding amount of KRW 16,000,000 under the transfer/acquisition agreement of the instant case, and the outstanding amount of KRW 15,00,000,000 under the entrustment contract of the instant case.

B. The Plaintiff is liable as a contracting party because the Plaintiff participated at the time of the preparation of the instant consignment contract and the transfer and takeover contract, and all of the contents thereof are known, and even if not, he is liable as the nominal lender.

Therefore, the plaintiff's 31,00,000 won against the defendant.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.17 2015가단5292588

-대구지방법원안동지원 2015.08.19 2015가단20049

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.22 2016가단43733

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.02.16 2015가단190458

-대구지방법원서부지원 2020.02.05 2018가단63119