logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.11.09 2017가단19585
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. around February 22, 2007, the Plaintiff: (a) around February 22, 2007, borrowed money under the name of Nonparty C from Nonparty C; (b) KRW 100 million per annum; (c) interest per annum; and (d) the borrowing period from February 28, 2007.

5. The loan certificate as described in the end of 27 was issued (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”).

B. KRW 100 million delivered by the Plaintiff in relation to the above loan certificate was used in repayment of the collateral collateral debt, which was established on E-Ba located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant loan”) that was named by the Defendant around that time.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1, 4, and 5, testimony of witness C, response of order to submit financial transaction information to the F Association Head, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On February 22, 2007, the Plaintiff lent KRW 100,000 to the Defendant to repay the collateral security debt of the instant loan borrowed under the name of the Defendant, and the due date has expired, and the Defendant must pay it.

B. The Defendant husband C was managing the instant loan in the name of the Defendant, and the Defendant was unaware of the monetary transaction between the Plaintiff and C, and there was no basis to prepare the instant loan certificate, and thus, there was no liability for the instant loan certificate obligations.

3. The judgment is based on the seal of the defendant, and the fact that C bears the following seals affixed to the defendant's name and affixed the above seal to the defendant's name, although there is no dispute between the parties, in full view of the witness's testimony and the whole purport of oral argument, it is recognized that C affixes the seal of the defendant without permission from the defendant at the time of the defendant. Thus, it is recognized that C was delegated by the defendant with the authority to affix the seal on behalf of the defendant on the loan of this case in the name of the defendant as KRW 100,000,000,000,000,000 won received from the plaintiff.

arrow