(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.11.05 2014가단20687

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) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.11.05 2014가단20687

대여금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 4,00,000 as well as the annual rate of KRW 5% from June 27, 2014 to November 5, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 21,00,000 to the Defendant on May 3, 2012, KRW 200,000, KRW 20,000 on May 20, 2013, KRW 6,000,00 on June 21, 2013, KRW 1,000 on August 1, 2013, and KRW 21,00,000 on September 4, 2013.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the above loan and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

2. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings as a result of the order to submit financial transaction information as of December 4, 2014 to the head of the office of the office of the office of the branch of the office of the government branch of the Agricultural Cooperative Co., Ltd. (including each number), Nos. 1 through 8 (including each number), and Nos. 1 through 1 and 2, and the order to submit financial transaction information as of December 4, 2014 to the head of the office of the office of the branch of the government branch of the agricultural cooperative of the Republic of Korea, the Plaintiff was deposited as the Defendant’s account on June 21, 2013 with the 1,00,000 won check issued as of June 21, 201, and if the Plaintiff was paid as the above No. 1,00 won, the Defendant received a relatively small amount of money from the Defendant, including the above 300 won borrowed money, and the Plaintiff’s money was acknowledged to have been deposited as the Defendant’s account.

However, as alleged by the Plaintiff, it is further difficult to specify the accurate amount and date of the loan by only the evidence presented by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

On the other hand, although the defendant defenses that the amount borrowed from the plaintiff was fully repaid, the defendant's defense that the amount that the defendant paid to the plaintiff is deemed as interest, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the above repayment, and therefore, the defendant's defense is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2017.01.12 2016가단222891

-서울남부지방법원 2015.01.15 2014나52891

-서울남부지방법원 2016.04.22 2015가단206878

-수원지방법원안양지원 2015.02.25 2014가단11084

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.06.10 2015가합72545