logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2017.01.12 2016나10092
대여금등
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added in the trial are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) C used money to loan money to the Defendant’s mother’s hospital expenses. The Plaintiff, without setting interest on April 9, 2014, transferred KRW 25 million to the account under the name of the Defendant. At the time, the Plaintiff transferred money to the account under the name of the Defendant with the capacity to repay the money to the Defendant. Since C was a lawful agent delegated with the authority to borrow money by the Defendant, such as using the said account, etc., the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 25 million from the Plaintiff, the said agent was the Defendant. On the premise of this, the Defendant transferred the said KRW 25 million to the Plaintiff’s mother’s mother. Accordingly, the Plaintiff, a joint and several surety, and the principal obligor transferred KRW 25 million to the Plaintiff’s account under the name of the principal obligor, even if the principal obligor received the said KRW 25 million directly from the Plaintiff’s account without paying the money, the Plaintiff was not directly borrowed from the Plaintiff’s account under the name of the principal obligor.

Therefore, the plaintiff is able to claim against the defendant for unjust enrichment of 25 million won and damages for delay.

B. Money transferred by the Plaintiff to the account under the name of the Defendant is only money lent by C, an son, and the Defendant does not borrow money.

C engages in the business of buying and selling scambling machines, and knew to the Plaintiff for a long time, and borrowed KRW 25 million from the Plaintiff on April 9, 2014 due to lack of operating funds at the time.

However, C only used a bank account under the name of the defendant due to bad credit.

The defendant is not a debtor for the plaintiff since there was no fact that he was involved in the above monetary rent.

2. The plaintiff borrowed money from the plaintiff first to determine the primary claim.

arrow