logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 서부지원 2017.01.11 2016가단5461
대여금등
Text

1. Defendant B’s KRW 80,000,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from July 1, 2015 to July 27, 2016.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff loaned Defendant B KRW 70,00,000 on February 27, 2015, and KRW 80,000 on June 5, 2015, respectively; Defendant B agreed to pay KRW 150,000,000 on June 5, 2015 by June 30, 2015 may be recognized according to the respective entries and arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the fact that the Plaintiff received KRW 70,00,000 from Defendant B is a person who is the Plaintiff.

Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 80,000,000 won and damages for delay calculated at each rate of 5% per annum as stipulated by the Civil Act from July 1, 2015 to July 27, 2016, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint in this case, and 15% per annum as stipulated by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the following day to the day of full payment.

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that Defendant B had obtained a building permit for each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant multi-family housing”) on the ground of 1129 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) in the city of Seosan-si, B, and constructed each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant multi-family housing”) and borne the Plaintiff’s debt by borrowing construction costs, Defendant B changed the name of the owner of the instant multi-family housing under the name of Defendant C as to the instant multi-family housing, which is its sole property

Therefore, Defendant B is deemed to have transferred the instant apartment house to Defendant C, or to have held title trust, and this should be revoked within the scope of the Plaintiff’s claim as a fraudulent act undermining the obligee of Defendant B, and as such, Defendant C shall pay KRW 80,000,000 to the Plaintiff.

B. First of all, we examine whether Defendant B transferred the instant multi-family housing to Defendant C, or held a title trust.

The entry of Gap evidence 3-1 to 15, 9-1 to 4 and the rice market.

arrow