(영문) 창원지방법원 2014.09.24 2014나1380 | 리걸엔진

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) 창원지방법원 2014.09.24 2014나1380

대여금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff loaned KRW 10 million to the Defendant at the rate of 48% per annum and on July 30, 2003 (hereinafter the instant loan). The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the instant loan and interest or delay damages thereon.

B. The creditor of the instant loan asserted by the Defendant is not the Plaintiff but C, and is not the case.

Even if the Defendant fully repaid the instant loan, the Defendant did not have any obligation to respond to the Plaintiff’s claim.

2. Determination:

A. According to the evidence No. 1 of the judgment as to the creditor of the loan of this case, it is recognized that a notarial deed (hereinafter referred to as the "notarial deed of this case") was prepared on January 17, 2003 by the purport that the plaintiff set up and lent to the defendant on July 30, 2003 the interest rate of KRW 10 million per annum and July 30, 2003.

However, in light of the following circumstances recognized by the evidence Nos. 4, 5, 7, and 10 of the evidence Nos. 5, 7, and 10 of the said loans, the creditors of the instant loans appear not to have been C but to have been C. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff, not C, lent the above KRW 10 million to the Defendant.

1) The Defendant did not attend at the time of the preparation of the instant notarial deed, and the Plaintiff and C made the instant notarial deed with the power of attorney of the Defendant in the notarial office. 2) C was holding the instant notarial deed, and C filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the instant loan claim against the Defendant under the Incheon District Court 2012Ga376566, and the said lawsuit was withdrawn, and returned the instant notarial deed to the Defendant.

3) The Defendant paid part of the interest on the instant loan to the account in the name of C’s husband and wife D. 4) C had engaged in credit business under the trade name of “E”, and registered its business under the name of the Plaintiff.

5) The Plaintiff filed a complaint against C with perjury (Jinwon District Prosecutors' Office, Jinju District Prosecutors' Office.)

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2016.06.23 2015나3702

-인천지방법원 2020.07.08 2019가단213251

-부산지방법원 2014.06.12 2013가단28397

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.07.07 2013가단5110798

-광주지방법원 2014.11.27 2014가단23107