logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.10.30 2015가단16415
사해행위취소
Text

1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 20,000,000 as well as 20% per annum from May 22, 2015 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. A. Around October 2014, the Plaintiff became aware of, and became aware of, Defendant B at the beauty room where Defendant B was on the basis of basic facts.

on November 17, 2014, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 20 million to Defendant B.

Defendant B received the above KRW 20 million in order to use the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

B. The plaintiff asserts that he lent the above KRW 20 million to the defendant B.

D. Defendant B, while paying the above KRW 20 million to Defendant B’s director, did not need to be repaid if the Plaintiff and Defendant B were to live together with the Plaintiff and Defendant B. It claimed to the effect that the Plaintiff thought it as a gift and received it.

C. It cannot be readily concluded that the receipt of money between the judged couple was a donation, and it is more so so in the educational relationship between men and women.

The issue of whether the recipient of the money is a loan for consumption or a donation shall be determined by considering the circumstances of the receipt of the money, the source, amount, and the existence of the intention of return.

As to whether a water source of KRW 20 million was a loan for consumption or a donation of a loan for consumption, the following circumstances revealed by adding the purport of the entire pleadings as seen earlier, namely, ① the Plaintiff remitted a large amount of money of KRW 20 million to Defendant B at the time when the period of the teaching system and the amount of the money remitted to Defendant B passed. In light of the period of the teaching system and the amount of the money remitted, it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff donated a loan of KRW 20 million to Defendant B with an intention not to receive a refund, and ② the money was donated to maintain educational relations.

arrow