logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.11.16 2017나8569
대여금
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Summary of the parties' assertion

A. On February 8, 2013, the Plaintiff agreed to lend KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant and C upon the request of the Defendant and C (which became final and conclusive on February 8, 2013) and transferred KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant’s account on April 30, 2009.

The Defendant and C shall pay to the Plaintiff 10,000,000 won and damages for delay as they jointly and severally, since they did not fully repay the borrowed money until now, unlike the promise to repay it as soon as possible.

B. The Defendant did not know the Plaintiff at all, but did not borrow KRW 10,000,00 from the Plaintiff.

The Defendant concluded a fund subscription contract with C, which is a fund intermediary of the private equity fund company, and remitted KRW 25,000,000 to C as a member of the fund, on March 13, 2008 and March 14, 2008. Since the Defendant terminated the said fund and thereafter refunded KRW 10,000,000 from C by account transfer on April 30, 2009, and thereafter, it was known that the said money would be deposited from another person’s account before refunding KRW 10,00,000,000.

2. According to the judgment on the cause of the claim No. 1 and No. 3-2 of the evidence No. 3-2, the plaintiff is found to have transferred KRW 10,00,000 from the company bank account of the defendant's company (D) to the defendant's bank account on April 30, 2009, but it is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff entered into a monetary loan agreement with the defendant to lend KRW 10,000,000 with the defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Rather, according to the purport of Gap evidence No. 2 and the whole pleadings, the content certification that the plaintiff sent to the defendant prior to the filing of the lawsuit in this case includes the mobile phone number C used, and the address of the defendant, stating the defendant's address, is the abstract of the defendant's resident registration card.

arrow