logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2017.10.25 2017나23402
채무부존재확인
Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The term of a monetary loan agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on December 14, 2007 is based.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 14, 2007, the Defendant lent KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff’s husband C with interest rate of KRW 24% per annum, and on March 14, 2008 (hereinafter “instant loan”). On the same day, a notary public drafted a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement with the same content as the deed No. 2007 and No. 407 from the law firm City.

B. C repaid the Defendant the instant loan amounting to KRW 50 million on March 12, 2008.

C. Meanwhile, on March 14, 2008, C re-loaned KRW 50 million from the Defendant on June 10, 2008, and repaid it on June 10, 2008, and again borrowed KRW 50 million on June 13, 2008.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 5, 6, Gap evidence 8 through 12, Gap witness C's testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff’s obligation under a monetary loan agreement of December 14, 2007 was extinguished by repayment of KRW 50 million to the Defendant, a co-debtor, on March 12, 2008, and as long as the Defendant contests this, there is a benefit of confirmation.

B. As to this, the Defendant asserts that, not as the repayment of the instant loan, the Defendant did not receive KRW 50 million from C on March 12, 2008, but as the Defendant was temporarily in custody of C on March 14, 2008 and returned it again on March 14, 2008, the Defendant still holds a loan deposit certificate and a notarial deed, and the Defendant submitted a list of property in the case of property name applied by Seoul Northern District Court 2010Kao551, and that part of interest was paid through the deposit account in the Plaintiff’s name after 2010.

According to the evidence No. 4, the defendant was transferred KRW 50 million from C on March 12, 2008 and transferred KRW 50 million to C on March 14, 2008 thereafter, but it is recognized that the defendant again transferred KRW 50 million to C on March 14, 2008, and as seen earlier, it is in the process of borrowing money after repayment by C.

arrow