logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.07.06 2016가단3648
대여금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 75,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from April 27, 2016 to the date of complete payment.

Reasons

The fact that the Plaintiff (C Co., Ltd.) and the Defendant, D, and E (F) (hereinafter “Defendant et al.”) drafted a loan certificate (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”) and a sand security contract in attached Form 95 million won on July 13, 2012 between the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Defendant et al.”) and the Defendant, D, and E (hereinafter “Defendant et al.”) do not conflict between the parties.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 75 million based on the loan certificate of this case (the remaining amount after reduction of KRW 20 million for which mediation was completed by D and E), and the Defendant asserted that it was only delivered KRW 75 million from the Plaintiff as business expenses, and it did not have been borrowed, and that the terms and conditions of the loan certificate of this case were not fulfilled, and thus, it cannot be paid.

In the loan certificate of this case, the loan certificate of this case states that "the defendant, etc. shall pay to the plaintiff 95 million won under Article 2 (b) of the condition that "the defendant, etc. shall pay to the plaintiff 95 million won in full", and Article 2 (b) of the attached sand collateral contract of this case states that "the defendant, etc. shall pay within three months after the progress of Article 5 (b)" and Article 5 (b) states that "the time when this sand collateral contract of this case is valid after the execution of dredging contract with the Korea Rural Community Corporation" (refer to the attached Form), and there is no dispute between the parties that the defendant, etc. and the Korea Rural Community Corporation did not conclude dredging contract between the defendant, etc. and the Korea Rural Community Corporation.

However, the loan certificate of this case and the sand security contract of this case were separately prepared, and Article 1 (3) of the sand security contract provides that "the defendant, etc. shall pay the amount of credit to the plaintiff by selling and selling the dredging quantity and repaying the amount of credit to the plaintiff." In light of the details of each of the above provisions, etc. of the loan certificate of this case, the annexed sand security contract is merely merely prepared for the payment of the loan of this case or for the security of the loan of this case, and the claim of this case under the loan certificate of this case itself is defined as a right subject to suspension.

arrow