logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.09.22 2015가단128872
대여금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 35,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from March 26, 2016 to September 22, 2016, and the following.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. As the Plaintiff lent KRW 5 million to the Defendant on November 13, 2013, and KRW 30 million on March 3, 2014, the Defendant is obligated to pay each of the loans and the interest and delay damages on the day following the lending date to the Plaintiff.

B. The Plaintiff’s donation to C and the Defendant is not the Defendant’s donation, which is the operating fund of the wood craft shop operated jointly with the Defendant’s ASEAN, during the marriage life.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s transfer of KRW 5 million to the Defendant on November 13, 2013, and KRW 30 million to the Defendant on March 3, 2014 does not conflict between the parties, and the following circumstances are acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account: (a) whether the said money was a loan; (b) whether the Plaintiff was a loan; (c) whether the Plaintiff was a loan; (d) whether the Plaintiff was a loan; and (e) whether the Plaintiff was a loan; and (e) whether the Defendant received the loan from the Plaintiff as a witness in the relevant case ( Daegu District Court Decision 2015Na308921). In full view of the following circumstances, the Defendant sent on January 15, 2014, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a text “to be resolved within two years after he/she was repaid every month; and (e) it is the most important and highly high time for the Defendant to be immediately asked at the last time; and (e) whether the Defendant was given a loan from the Plaintiff as a witness.

B. Damages for delay: (a) there is no evidence to prove that there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the interest on the loan; and (b) it is not deemed that the due date has been clearly agreed; (b) thus, damages for delay shall accrue from March 25, 2016, which is the date of

3. If so, the Defendant’s loaning KRW 35 million to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s loaning KRW 35 million from March 26, 2016 to September 22, 2016, which is the date when the Defendant rendered a substantial judgment to dispute over the scope of the obligation, prescribed by the Civil Act, and the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion of Legal Proceedings, etc. from the following day to the date when the obligation is fully repaid.

arrow