logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.10.15 2020가단175
약정금반환 등
Text

1. Defendant B shall pay 40,000,000 won to the Plaintiff and 12% per annum from February 18, 2020 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff asserts as follows. A.

On May 16, 2015, Defendant C, if investing in Defendant B, who is engaged in trade business, paid a dividend of 8% per month to the Plaintiff, was liable for the same error.

B. The Plaintiff believed the foregoing horses by Defendant C and invested KRW 40,00,000,000 in total, including KRW 10,000,000 on May 18, 2014, and KRW 12,00 on August 12, 2014, and KRW 10,00,000 on August 14, 2018.

C. However, Defendant B did not actually engage in the trade business, and did not pay to the Plaintiff a monthly dividend of 8%.

After that, on February 28, 2017, Defendant B prepared and ordered a loan certificate of KRW 40,000,000 to the Plaintiff, and Defendant C prepared and issued a loan certificate of KRW 100,000,000 on November 29, 2019 to the effect that the Plaintiff would pay KRW 100,000,000 until November 28, 2021.

2. Determination of applicable provisions of Acts in respect of claims against Defendant B: Judgment by deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act);

3. In full view of the respective descriptions and arguments in the evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 5 as to the claim against Defendant C, Defendant C is engaged in trade business by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff may receive dividends of KRW 40,00,000 in total from the investment of KRW 8% per month to Defendant B. However, in addition, as to whether Defendant C was aware of the fact that Defendant C did not engage in trade business and is unable to pay dividends of KRW 8% per month, it is false to the Plaintiff, while it is well aware that Defendant C would be unable to pay dividends of KRW 8% per month, it is difficult to use the evidence as evidence, since it is difficult to acknowledge that the Plaintiff already returned to Defendant C as evidence, and it is insufficient to recognize this fact solely with the entries in the evidence Nos. 4 and 5 and the result of each financial order by the party members, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise.

4. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is justified.

arrow