(영문) 인천지방법원 2019.09.26 2018가단265224

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) 인천지방법원 2019.09.26 2018가단265224

대여금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 76,580,00 and KRW 72,97,807 among them, from October 17, 2018 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the grounds for the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 5, the defendant entered into a loan agreement with the plaintiff on January 9, 2018, with a loan agreement of 76,000,000 won for principal and interest, 60 months for the loan period, 9.9% per annum for the loan interest rate of 25% per annum for the loan, and 76,000,000 won for the loan from the plaintiff (hereinafter "the loan agreement of this case"), and

According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 25% per annum, which is the overdue interest rate from October 17, 2018 to the date of full payment, for the remaining principal (=76,00,000 won - 3,02,193 won) of KRW 76,580,000 and the remaining principal of the loan (=72,97,800,000).

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant is not liable under the loan contract of this case, since the instant loan contract was concluded by the deception of the assertion D and the preparation of the loan agreement was made by E without the consent of the Defendant.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 7 and Eul evidence No. 17, the defendant allowed D to conclude the loan contract in the name of the defendant and delivered necessary documents, such as a certificate of personal seal impression, to him/her. The defendant confirmed that he/she directly prepared the loan agreement in telephone conversations with the plaintiff, and it is recognized that the defendant finally approved the formation of the contract in accordance with the loan agreement.

According to this, the loan contract of this case between the plaintiff and the defendant was effective.

The defendant had entered into the loan agreement of this case by deceiving D.

However, according to Article 110 (2) of the Civil Code, the other party's declaration of intention.

참조조문

-민법 제110조 제2항

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2015.04.17 2013가단213391

-제주지방법원 2019.07.01 2019가단530

-창원지방법원통영지원 2019.01.30 2018가단5163

-광주지방법원 2019.07.05 2018가단541078

-창원지방법원 2016.11.23 2015나9183