logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.06 2017가합514543
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 12, 1995, the Plaintiff married with D on August 12, 1995, D had been Defendant B, E, and F with the former wife, and Defendant C is the husband of Defendant E.

B. D, around July 20, 1998, donated to the Plaintiff the G Apartment 309 Dong 1905 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed on July 23, 1998 with respect to the instant apartment.

C. Meanwhile, on July 24, 2002 with respect to the apartment of this case, the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage of KRW 384,000,000 with respect to the debtor D, the mortgagee-mortgage-backed mortgage-backed bank, the amount of maximum debt, and the maximum debt amount of KRW 180,000,000 respectively, was completed on February 16, 2006.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion and D from around 2014 to Defendant B: (a) interest rate of KRW 260,000,000 per month; (b) interest rate of KRW 1.5% per month after the date of performance; and (c) interest rate of KRW 200,000,000 per month for Defendant C; and (d) the date of performance was set at 1.5% per month after the date of performance; and (b) the date of repayment; (c) interest rate of KRW 200,000 for the instant apartment owned by the Plaintiff was set at 1 month after the date of performance request; and (d) lent money to the Plaintiff; and (e) caused the Defendants to prepare a loan certificate or make changes in the future of the Plaintiff; and (e) the Defendants are obliged to pay the Plaintiff each of the above loans and interest or delay damages

3. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 4 and Eul evidence Nos. 1-1 and 2 as to the cause of the claim: D’s total amount of KRW 260,00,000 from September 1, 2014 to August 28, 2015 = KRW 40,000,000 on September 1, 2014 = January 8, 2015;

arrow