logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.15 2014가단103860
약정금
Text

1. The Defendants jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff KRW 90,000,000, and Defendant C with respect thereto from June 2, 2014; and Defendant B from June 2, 2014.

Reasons

1. According to Gap's judgment as to the cause of the claim (each of the defendants did not prepare the above written evidence, and the above written evidence is disputed the establishment of each of the above written evidence, but according to the result of appraiser D's automatic and written appraisal of appraiser Eul, and the result of appraiser Eul's written evidence and stamp image appraisal of appraiser Eul, the signature stamped and the signature under the above written statement "C" was that of defendant C, and the signature under the above written statement "B" was that of defendant B, and it is recognized that the signature under the above written statement was in fact of the above document, the authenticity of the whole document is presumed to have been formed) according to the statement of defendant B and F, who is a form of F, and F's h lease in G, and that the defendant C, a form of the above document, transferred 90 million won to Eul in relation to the above document's claim (hereinafter "claim claim in this case"), and if the plaintiff did not receive the above claim in advance from 200,000 won, it can be recognized that the above agreement was reached against the defendant 2008.2.7.

According to the above facts, the defendants shall pay KRW 90 million to the plaintiff in accordance with the agreement of this case, but it is reasonable to view that the time when the claims of this case were repaid by I from I was set as the time limit for the above agreed amount obligations. Since the claims of this case in this case became final and conclusive as the lawsuit filed by F against I against I was lost by the above lawsuit filed by F, the period during which the above agreed amount was due, and thus, the above agreed amount was due.

On the other hand, in the case of an indefinite term, the obligor becomes liable for delay from the time when it became known that the time limit has arrived (Article 387 of the Civil Act), and the Defendants were not parties to the lawsuit.

arrow