(영문) 청주지방법원 2016.02.17 2014가단4521

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) 청주지방법원 2016.02.17 2014가단4521

대여금 등

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On November 8, 2011, the Defendant sent the Defendant’s seal imprint and seal imprint to D through C.

B. On November 9, 201, the Plaintiff’s credit cooperative drafted a loan transaction agreement (Evidence A; hereinafter “instant loan transaction agreement”) with the Defendant to grant a loan (hereinafter “instant loan”) as of November 9, 201, with the loan maturity of KRW 299,000,000 on November 9, 2011, and the Defendant’s seal impression was affixed on the lender’s column.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2, witness C, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the argument (i.e., the plaintiff defendant lent the name to D so that it can obtain the instant loan, and accordingly, D received the instant loan from the plaintiff in the name of the defendant.

The Defendant, as a party to the instant loan contract, is obligated to pay the remainder of 217,344,755 won and delay damages therefor to the Plaintiff.

Luxembourg Defendant only lent the name concerning the sale of real estate to Defendant D, and did not lend the name concerning the loan of this case.

The signature of the loan transaction agreement (A No. 2) of this case is not limited to that of the defendant, but is based on the seal of the defendant, but is not affixed by the defendant's will.

B. (1) If the signature affixed on a private document is reproduced by his seal, barring special circumstances, it is presumed that the authenticity of the seal is established, i.e., the act of affixing the seal is based on the intent of the person in whose name the document is written, barring special circumstances. Once the authenticity of the seal is presumed, the authenticity of the document is presumed to have been established in accordance with Article 358

However, the presumption that the authenticity of the seal imprint is based on the intention of the holder of the title deed is actually presumed, so the person who disputes the authenticity of the seal imprint depends on the intention of the holder of the title deed.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제358조

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.10.24 2018나17630

-울산지방법원 2015.12.17 2014가합8147

-대전지방법원 2016.11.10 2016가단24762

-서울고등법원 2017.03.30 2016나2063775

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.04 2015나26701