(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2016.05.25 2015나5868

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) 서울동부지방법원 2016.05.25 2015나5868

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

1..

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On May 14, 2010, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant is jointly and severally liable with C to pay the principal and interest of the loan to the Plaintiff, as the joint and several surety of Codefendant C (hereinafter “C”) was set at the interest rate of KRW 12 million to the Defendant, who is his/her father, at the rate of KRW 3% per month.

According to Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiff transferred the amount of KRW 12 million to the deposit account in the name of the defendant.

However, according to the purport of the evidence No. 2-1, No. 2, No. 3, and No. 1, and the whole purport of the arguments and arguments, the plaintiff lent the above money at the request of C, received the loan certificate under the name of C (Evidence No. 3), and received interest from C, and the defendant claims that he was paid the above money to the defendant's account under the name of C upon the request of C, which is a bad credit holder, and according to the above evidence, C actually used the above money, there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff lent the above money to the defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

B. The Plaintiff asserted that C lent money to the Defendant to pay the said money to the Defendant’s deposit account under the name of the Defendant, his father, while operating the page, and that C used the said money as business funds in the course of operating the page jointly with C, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable with C to pay the said money.

The facts acknowledged in paragraph (1) above, as stated in subparagraph (4) or the Plaintiff’s above assertion, the Defendant expressed the intent of joint and several sureties’s loan obligations against the Plaintiff.

It is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant borrowed the above money with the operating funds of the above company while jointly operating C and C, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

C. The plaintiff is the defendant.

유사 판례

-서울동부지방법원 2018.04.06 2017가단139085

-서울고등법원 2017.03.10 2016나2033637

-서울동부지방법원 2019.05.31 2018나23881

-부산지방법원 2015.11.24 2015가단41448

-광주지방법원 2018.02.08 2017가합171