logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2019.12.12 2018나39370
대여금반환
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. According to the records on the legitimacy of the appeal for subsequent completion, the defendant's appeal for subsequent completion is lawful, since it is recognized that the documents of lawsuit, including a copy of the complaint of the first instance, and the original copy of the judgment, were served to the defendant by means of service by public notice, and the defendant was not aware of the fact that the lawsuit of this case and the judgment of the court of first instance were submitted within two weeks after he became aware of

2. Determination

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff loaned money to the Defendant from March 2012 to October 18, 2013, and the Plaintiff reached a total of KRW 14.5 million. The Defendant prepared a loan certificate confirming the loan on October 18, 2013. As such, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the loan principal of KRW 14.5 million and delay damages, such as the written claim.

B. 1) In the criminal case where the Plaintiff filed a fraudulent complaint against the Defendant on the second half of 2016 or the second half of 2017, the Defendant consistently stated that “the Defendant borrowed eight million won from the Plaintiff with land purchase funds at the police and prosecutorial investigation stage by the end of May 2013, 201, and the Plaintiff prepared a certificate of borrowing KRW 8 million by the end of May 13, 2012. Because of economic difficulties, the part that “the principal of the borrowed funds was not repaid and only a part of the interest was paid.” On October 18, 2013, 2013, the Defendant did not accept the principal of the borrowed funds from the Defendant’s prosecutorial office, including the loan certificate prepared on October 18, 2013, and the Defendant did not accept the principal of the borrowed funds from the Defendant’s prosecutorial office, but did not accept the loan principal from the Defendant’s office by 100,000,0000 won.”

arrow