(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.06.21 2016가합45840

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 2017.06.21 2016가합45840

대여금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 263,80,000 and KRW 70,000 among them, from December 1, 2016 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

On May 25, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into an investment agreement with the Defendant to receive KRW 140 million in total of the principal and KRW 70 million after one year from the date of deposit, and around that time, the Plaintiff paid KRW 70 million to the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant should pay to the plaintiff the sum of the agreed amount and the proceeds KRW 140 million.

Defendant 1 did not agree to the effect that the Defendant would repay 70 million won to the Plaintiff.

(2) Even if such an agreement was concluded, such agreement shall be deemed an agreement to return the proceeds of investment, and thus, it shall be presumed that the proceeds have accrued, but the Plaintiff cannot claim the proceeds.

③ The revenue is specified as the revenue.

Even if the legal nature of the loan is regarded as the interest of the loan, the above part of the claim should be limited under the Interest Limitation Act, or null and void in violation of Article 103 of the Civil Act.

Since the relevant legal principles are applied only to a monetary loan contract, the interest limitation law does not apply to a contract under which one of the parties receives an investment return from the other party and pay an investment return.

Here, whether a contract to transfer ownership of money and pay a certain price or a profit to the other party is a monetary loan to which the Interest Limitation Act applies, or an investment contract not subject to the Interest Limitation Act (in accordance with the specific contents of a contract, it constitutes a partnership agreement under the Civil Act, an anonymous partnership agreement under the Commercial Act, or an undisclosed association agreement under the Commercial Act), as well as the name of the contract in question, whether the payment or profit is fixed, whether the principal is guaranteed, the substantial structure of the contract such as the specific contents of the use of the principal, whether the lender or the investor is involved in the business, and whether it is before

참조조문

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2020.07.10 2020나2002906

-수원지방법원 2019.04.03 2018가단521372

-인천지방법원 2016.05.12 2015나16200

-부산지방법원 2014.09.03 2013가합47982

-전주지방법원 2020.12.16 2020가단14620