logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2011.08.23 2011가단1504
채무부존재확인등
Text

1. The Plaintiff’s notary public against the Defendant was the Daegu General Law Office, No. 974, July 31, 2009, No. 974.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On July 31, 2009, C, the Plaintiff’s wife, agreed to repay 47,000,000 won remaining after borrowing money from the Defendant several times until July 31, 2009 to the Defendant by December 31, 2010. At the Daegu General Law Office, C, on July 31, 2009, a notary public, approved the fact that he assumed the following obligations from the Defendant on July 31, 2009, and ordered the Defendant to repay the said obligations pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement, and the Defendant agreed to do so. The Defendant drafted a notarial deed on debt repayment contract (hereinafter “notarial deed”).

B. At the time of the preparation of the instant notarial deed, the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s debt based on the instant notarial deed.

C. From July 31, 2009 to October 6, 2010, the Plaintiff and C repaid KRW 27,548,500 in total to the Defendant with interest and principal on the above loan amount of KRW 47,00,000,00, as indicated in the calculation table of the attached appropriation amount.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 14 through 20, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1, 2, Eul evidence 4-1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion argues that C, one’s wife, has borrowed money from the Defendant and has paid interest and principal in the number of days after the execution of the notarial deed, and that the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant based on the notarial deed is nonexistent, and that the Defendant should return to the Plaintiff 18,458,000 won paid in excess of the above principal and interest of the loan, as unjust enrichment.

B. The fact that the Plaintiff and C repaid the total of KRW 27,548,500 from July 31, 2009 to October 6, 2010 after the execution of the notarial deed in this case is as seen above, and the Plaintiff and C exceeded the above KRW 27,548,50.

arrow