(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.11.11 2015나957 | 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) 창원지방법원 2015.11.11 2015나957

선수금반환

Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On September 12, 2013, the Plaintiff’s assertion entered into a labor contract with the Defendant. On September 5, 2013, before entering into the said labor contract, the Plaintiff agreed to deduct the Defendant from the Defendant’s future salary, and paid KRW 20,000,000 as an advance payment.

After that, while the defendant did not deduct the above amount from the defendant's pay upon the defendant's request, the contract was terminated because the defendant did not work from April 7, 2014.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the above advance payment and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. According to the records of Gap evidence No. 1, it is recognized that the plaintiff paid KRW 20,000,000 to the defendant on September 5, 2013.

However, the statement in Eul evidence No. 3 contains no objective evidence that there was an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant on the repayment of the money that the plaintiff paid to the defendant because any other disposition document, such as a loan certificate and a monetary loan contract, etc., was not prepared, ② there is no evidence that the plaintiff had determined the time and method of repayment at the time when the plaintiff pays the above money to the defendant; ③ there was no particular statement about the nature of the above money in the defendant's passbook at the time when the plaintiff transfers the above money to the defendant; ④ the defendant worked for the plaintiff company from September 12, 2013 to April 6, 2014, ④ the defendant had been paid from the plaintiff to the plaintiff company for about eight months after receiving the above money from the plaintiff, and the plaintiff was not paid in installments by the method of deducting the above money from the defendant's salary, and there is no evidence that the statement in evidence No. 1 and 2 of each of the above evidence alone is insufficient to support the plaintiff's assertion otherwise.

2. Conclusion

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2017.06.01 2016나10948

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.01.29 2014가단32963

-전주지방법원남원지원 2017.04.19 2017가단64

-인천지방법원 2020.09.15 2019나67145

-대전지방법원논산지원 2020.04.01 2019가합2247