logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.06.29 2017가단5487
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is the leakage of C, and C was unable to properly conduct financial transactions as a bad credit holder, and the Defendant opened an account in the name of the Defendant (hereinafter “instant account”) and allowed C to use it for C.

B. On November 23, 2010, the Plaintiff lent KRW 50 million to the instant account while lending KRW 50 million to the Defendant’s Dong-in C, the Defendant’s birth.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1-1 and Eul evidence 1-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that, even if the Defendant was not a party to a loan agreement with the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff received transfer of KRW 50 million to its own account in its name and obtained unjust enrichment without any legal grounds.

However, the facts that the Defendant allowed C to use the instant account, and that the Plaintiff remitted the said KRW 50 million to C by lending KRW 50 million to the instant account as seen earlier. Therefore, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant obtained profit equivalent to the said amount on the ground that the said amount was remitted to the instant account, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Moreover, the transfer of KRW 50 million to the instant account is governed by a loan agreement between the Plaintiff and C, and thus, cannot be deemed to have no legal grounds.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is not reasonable.

B. The plaintiff claiming a tort asserts that C borrowed KRW 50 million from the plaintiff without the intention or ability to repay, and the defendant knew that C used the account of this case to obtain money from the plaintiff and let C use the account of this case, so the defendant is obligated to pay the above fraud amount of KRW 50 million as joint tortfeasor and damages for delay.

However, at the time when the Defendant permitted C to use the instant account, C.

arrow