logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.09.29 2014가합11768
대여금 등
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B and C jointly share KRW 150,000,000 and those related thereto from February 21, 2014.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 31, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into an investment contract for the purchase of Gimwons (hereinafter “instant investment contract”) with Defendant B and Defendant C as a guarantor, and transferred KRW 150 million to Defendant D’s Nonghyup bank account, a general manager, on the same day.

B. From October 31, 2013 to December 27, 2013, Defendant D used KRW 83,249,600, out of KRW 150,000,000 invested by the Plaintiff, as the fund for the purchase of Kim originals of Defendant B, and used the remainder for Defendant B’s interest liability, credit card payment, and purchase of equipment and materials.

C. On February 21, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a novation agreement with Defendant B and Defendant B’s representative director E, Defendant C, and Plaintiff’s 150 million won investment in Defendant B as loans to Defendant B, the representative director E, and Defendant C. The agreement rate for the renewal agreement was set at 2% per month, the due date was set at April 30, 2014 (hereinafter “instant novation agreement”); and Defendant D stated “if there is any error in the performance of duties concerning the payment of the funds, it will be liable for civil criminal liability” at the end of the instant novation agreement.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1, 2, 5, 7, Eul's 2, Eul's 2

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff filed a claim against Defendant B and C with the Defendant B and C for the payment of the loan of KRW 150 million and damages for delay thereof under the instant novation agreement, and as to Defendant C, the Plaintiff filed a claim for damages for tort on the ground that the Defendant C conspired with the Plaintiff and acquired the Plaintiff’s investment money by deceiving the Plaintiff.

According to the above facts, the investment contract of this case was changed to the loan obligation of KRW 150 million against the plaintiff of defendant B and C in accordance with the loan agreement of this case, and thus, the defendant B and the defendant.

arrow