logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.12.27 2015가단206063
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On or around June 25, 2014, a foundation fact-finding loan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Had Capital loan”) transferred a claim based on a loan agreement entered in the attached loan transaction agreement (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) to the Defendant and notification of the assignment of the claim to the Plaintiff around August 11, 2014 may be recognized by taking into account the absence of dispute between the parties concerned or the entire purport of the statement in subparagraph 2 and the entire pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that, since the loan contract of this case was concluded by B with the plaintiff's name copied, the plaintiff asserts that there is no obligation of the plaintiff against the defendant under the loan contract of this case.

As to this, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff directly concluded the instant loan agreement, and that the agreement was valid between the Plaintiff and the Hah Capital loan. Even if B concluded the instant loan agreement by using the Plaintiff’s name, the express representation doctrine under Article 126 of the Civil Act is analogically applied. Therefore, the Plaintiff asserts that the Plaintiff bears the obligation to return the principal and interest of the loan under the instant loan agreement.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions in the evidence Nos. 1 and 10 as to the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff entered into the instant loan agreement and the overall purport of the pleadings, the Defendant’s assertion, which is premised on the premise that the Plaintiff entered into the instant loan agreement with the Plaintiff directly and concluded the instant loan agreement with the Plaintiff and concluded the relevant loan agreement with the Plaintiff on April 16, 2013, and submitted the forged loan transaction agreement with the Plaintiff as if the Plaintiff were the Plaintiff himself/herself and received the loan of KRW 3,00,000,000 from the loan loan.

C. (1) The expression agent under Article 126 of the Civil Act shall express or impliedly express his/her intent to act on behalf of himself/herself.

arrow