(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.07.04 2018나2223 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.07.04 2018나2223

대여금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. In the first instance court’s determination as to the legitimacy of appeal for subsequent completion, all litigation documents, such as a copy of complaint against the defendant and a notice of date for pleading, were served by public notice, and the pleadings have been proceeded. On February 6, 2018, the judgment of winning the plaintiff was rendered, and the original copy of the judgment of the first instance also was served on the defendant by public notice. The defendant was not aware of the fact that the lawsuit of this case and the judgment of the first instance were filed on March 29, 2018, and the original copy of the judgment was issued on April 4, 2018, with the knowledge that the judgment was rendered only when the original copy was inspected and copied on March 29, 2018.

In such a case, it is reasonable to deem that the defendant was unable to observe the peremptory appeal period, due to failure to know the progress and result of the lawsuit in this case due to a cause not attributable to himself. Therefore, the subsequent appeal in this case filed within two weeks after such cause ceases to exist is lawful.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. The plaintiff asserts that on July 13, 2009, the plaintiff lent KRW 10 million to the defendant, and that the defendant should pay KRW 10 million and delay damages to the plaintiff. Accordingly, the defendant asserted that the defendant borrowed KRW 10 million from the plaintiff as the former wife and the plaintiff's friendship C merely borrowed KRW 10 million from the plaintiff, and that he did not borrow it.

B. In a case where a person transfers money to another person’s deposit account by means of a transfer of money, etc., the remittance may be based on various legal causes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da30861, Jul. 26, 2012). Therefore, even if there is no dispute as to the fact that money was given and received between the parties, if the Defendant contests the Plaintiff’s assertion that the lending was made, the party bears the burden of proving

Supreme Court Decision 201No. 24 Decided January 24, 2018

참조판례

-대법원 2012. 7. 26. 선고 2012다30861 판결

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2019.10.10 2019나1203

-부산지방법원 2019.04.11 2017나54340

-부산지방법원 2019.10.10 2018나4564

-부산지방법원 2019.11.14 2019나1661

-부산지방법원 2020.02.13 2019나4431