logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.10.08 2014가단6530
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s account of the Defendant Company was KRW 27,00,000,000 on July 31, 2012, and the same year

8. 16.10,000,000 won, and the same year.

8. 10,00,000 won for 27.10,000 won for 30,000,000 won for 10.1, 10,000 for 22, 11.22,00,000 for 20,000 for 20,000 for 20,000 for 20,000 for 20,000 for 20,00 for 20

1. 31.20,000,000 won for the same year; and

2. 28.8,00,000 won, and the same year.

5. 28. 3,00,000 won remitted total of KRW 138,00,000.

B. On August 8, 2012, the Plaintiff’s account deposited KRW 30,000,000 from C, the representative director of the Defendant Company, and KRW 10,000,00 from D on August 17, 2012, respectively.

[Ground for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence No. 1, and the purport of whole pleading

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant Company loaned operating funds to the Defendant Company, and that the Defendant Company sold in lots, the Plaintiff agreed to receive a loan out of the sales price, and that the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 138,000,000 to the Defendant Company from July 31, 2012 to May 28, 2013.

On August 8, 2012, the Defendant Company repaid KRW 40,000,000 out of the above loans by depositing KRW 30,000,000 from the account of C, and KRW 10,000,00 from the account of D on August 17, 2012 into each Plaintiff’s account.

Therefore, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the borrowed amount of KRW 98,000,000 and damages for delay.

B. Determination 1) Even though there is no dispute as to the fact that money has been received between the parties, if there is no dispute as to the cause of the receipt of money, the plaintiff who asserts that it was received as a loan for consumption (see Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972) has the burden of proving that it was received as a loan for consumption (see Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Dec. 2, 1972).

The Plaintiff receives a document, such as a certificate of borrowing from the Defendant Company, or the maturity or interest rate of loans with the Defendant Company.

arrow