logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.11.08 2018가단29295
청구이의
Text

1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff is a law firm C, No. 2366, August 29, 2012.

Reasons

1. According to the evidence evidence No. 1, the Plaintiff’s assertion that, on August 29, 2012, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 18,000,000 from the Defendant and repaid it until September 29, 2012, can be recognized as the fact that a notary public prepared and executed a notarial deed of a monetary loan for consumption under Article 2366 of the deed in C by a law firm as the deed No. 2366 in September 29, 2012 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

2. The parties' assertion

A. On September 6, 2017, the Plaintiff made a proposal by the Defendant that the principal shall be repaid to the Defendant with no passbook deposited in the amount of KRW 500,000 each month after the preparation of the instant notarial deed, and that if the Plaintiff paid KRW 4,00,000,000 on September 6, 2017, the Plaintiff would be paid in full, and paid KRW 4,00,000 until October 30 of the instant notarial deed, the enforcement based on the instant notarial deed shall be denied. This is not a domestic affairs.

① The Plaintiff’s June 23, 2016 and the same year to the Defendant.

8. On 22. Each of the above 500,000 won repaid to KRW 1,00,000. ② The Defendant promised to deduct the Plaintiff’s fine of KRW 3,00,000 from the Defendant’s debt on the instant notarial deed loans. ③ The Plaintiff paid KRW 500,000 to the Defendant as the advance payment, but the Defendant was not successful in the said real estate brokerage, which set off against the Defendant’s claim to return the advance payment amount of KRW 8,970,00 with the Defendant’s claim to return the advance payment amount of KRW 18,530,000 (=18,000,000) to the Defendant’s claim to return the advance payment amount of KRW 3,00,000 from the amount equal to the Defendant’s claim on the instant notarial deed.

B. The Defendant received KRW 5,30,000 from the Plaintiff during the period from August 30, 2012 to August 23, 2013, and received KRW 4,530,000 in total from the Plaintiff and received KRW 1,00,000 on September 6, 2017, and KRW 27,000 on October 27, 100,000, and KRW 1,000,000 on October 30 of the same year.

However, it is like the plaintiff's assertion.

arrow