logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.08.29 2017가단31568
대여금등
Text

1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 38,632,00 with respect to the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from July 4, 2012 to June 27, 2018.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a personal business entity specializing in the supply of miscellaneous hardware, construction materials, etc. with the trade name of “D,” and Defendant B is a construction business entity, and Defendant C is a child of Defendant B.

B. Around June 22, 2010, the Plaintiff lent KRW 50 million to Defendant B, and around July 1, 2010, sold to Defendant B the amount equivalent to KRW 18,882,831 of the Rotterdam materials.

C. Defendant B prepared to the Plaintiff a loan certificate (Evidence 1) stipulating that the above loan amounting to KRW 50 million was paid by May 30, 2012, and KRW 18,882,831, the price of goods was paid by August 30, 2012, and at the time Defendant C guaranteed Defendant B’s obligations.

C. Defendant B paid to the Plaintiff KRW 6 million on July 2, 2012, and KRW 4 million on July 3, 2012.

(1) The plaintiff argues that 9 million won of the above money is the payment of the above money, and 1 million won was the payment of the above loan, but when comparing the repayment date with the above loan repayment date and the payment period under the above loan certificate, the defendant Eul paid the above money with the payment of the above loan which has already come due. Meanwhile, each of the above money was transferred from the account in the name of the defendant Eul corporation operated by the defendant Eul to the account in the name of the plaintiff's wife. [Evidences: evidence: Gap 1 through 5, Eul 1, 2, and all of the arguments]

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the loan amounting to KRW 40 million ( KRW 50 million - KRW 6 million - KRW 18,82,831, and delay damages for each of them, except in extenuating circumstances.

I would like to say.

B. 1) The Defendants asserted that the statute of limitations has expired since the above loan claims were subject to the five-year commercial statute of limitations and the three-year short-term statute of limitations.

Unless otherwise provided in this Act, the prescription of claims arising from homicides and Article 64 (1) of the Commercial Act shall be granted for five years.

arrow