logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.06.27 2013가단5155265
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff borrowed money of KRW 27,630,00 in cash to the Defendant on August 24, 2010 so that the Defendant may repay the money borrowed from Nonparty C, KRW 7.2 million on September 24, 2010, KRW 3 million on September 24, 2010, and KRW 10.5 million on December 31, 2010, to the Defendant lent KRW 1,05 million on December 29, 2012, to the Defendant that deposited KRW 27,630,00 in cash and KRW 4.4.8 million on the Plaintiff’s credit card.

Therefore, the defendant shall repay the money stated in the purport of the claim to the plaintiff as a loan, and even if the loan claim is not accepted, the defendant shall return the money equivalent to the above amount to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment

2. According to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 3, Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 7, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, including each judgment number, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff sent money to the defendant's account as shown in the attached Table Nos. 1 and 2, and the fact that the defendant purchased some goods with the plaintiff's credit card does not conflict between the parties.

However, the Plaintiff paid money to the Defendant from August 2010 to March 201, 201 due to the relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, as a matter of time, under the name of living expenses, and the fact that the Defendant experienced miscarriage during that period was not in dispute between the parties, and therefore, the Plaintiff paid money to the Defendant for that period.

It is insufficient to view that the Plaintiff lent the money as stated in the purport of the claim to the Defendant merely because the Plaintiff’s credit card or the Defendant had the Defendant carry the goods with the Plaintiff’s credit card, and it is difficult to believe that the E’s statement (Evidence No. 3)

Rather, in full view of the above evidence and evidence No. 4, the money deposited in the defendant's account as above, or the goods acquired by the defendant by the plaintiff's credit card, etc. to the defendant.

arrow