(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.07.22 2015나1862 | 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) 대구지방법원 2015.07.22 2015나1862

대여금

Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion was received upon D's request, and on March 24, 2005, KRW 3 million, and the same year.

6. The money transferred to the bank account under the name of each defendant on December 19, 23, 200,000 won and 4.5 million won on December 19, 19 of the same year. Among them, the money that the plaintiff remitted to the defendant upon D's request was used as household funds, such as purchase of the material or use as the agreed amount for the assault case, so the defendant is liable to pay 8 million won and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. The defendant alleged that D was responsible for his passbook, but D was unaware of the fact that D borrowed money from the plaintiff, and since D used the above money for gambling, the defendant did not have a duty to pay the above money to the plaintiff.

2. According to the judgment No. 1, Gap evidence No. 2, the plaintiff's account in the name of the defendant was 3 million won on March 24, 2005, and the same year.

6. It is acknowledged that each remittance of KRW 2 million was made on December 19, 23, 200 and KRW 4.5 million on the same year. Meanwhile, considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the entire purport of the statement and pleading No. 2, namely, the Plaintiff: (a) the Plaintiff lent money upon request from D; and (b) the fact that each of the above amounts was transferred from the bank account in the name of the Defendant to the bank account in the name of D after being transferred to the bank account in the name of the Defendant; and (c) the same amount was transferred from the bank account in the name of the Defendant to the bank account in the name of D after being transferred to the bank account in the name of the Defendant, it is insufficient to deem the Defendant to be the obligor who borrowed the above amount from

[A’s certificate No. 2 (A’s certificate), stating that “A shall be repaid until February 30, 2009,” and the name and seal of D, the Defendant’s name and seal, and the Defendant’s name and seal are written and sealed, but the above loan certificate is deemed to have been paid to the Plaintiff money.

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 목포지원 2013.02.19 2012고단2038

-대전지방법원 2018.05.30 2017가단20477

-수원지방법원 2015.12.18 2015나17187

-인천지방법원 2015.01.16 2014나7094

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2018.12.14 2018고단1869