logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원홍성지원 2017.05.11 2015가합1946
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion begins with the Defendant who was his spouse in around 2004, and was living together until around 2005 with the Defendant in a de facto marital relationship.

During that period, the Defendant demanded that the Plaintiff lend business funds to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff lent KRW 3,495,283,572 in total by account transfer to the Defendant, and the Defendant lent KRW 858,875,160 in total to the lebs that were supplied by the Defendant from Yinjin and Yeul rice.

In addition, the Plaintiff also lent KRW 336,960,00 to the Defendant’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s KRW 168,00,000.

From December 24, 2005 to January 19, 2006, the Plaintiff sought loans of KRW 66,710,000, and KRW 71,976,195, and KRW 138,686,195, and KRW 68,96,195, and KRW 68,960,00, and KRW 100,00,000, in total, from the Plaintiff’s Han Bank Account to the Defendant’s Agricultural Cooperative Account, over 12 times from June 16, 2006 to July 4, 2007, and KRW 71,976,195, and KRW 138,686,195, and KRW 68,960,00, and KRW 100,000,00,00 for loans to C, and damages for delay.

2. Determination

A. According to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 2, 3-1, 3-2, 7-1, 2, and 20 of evidence Nos. 1, 7-2, and 20, the facts that the Plaintiff and the Defendant posted a marriage ceremony on or around April 9, 2005, and that a sum of KRW 138,686,195 from the Plaintiff’s account was transferred to the Defendant’s account or approved as the credit card price under the Defendant’s name, as alleged by the Plaintiff from December 24, 2005 to July 4, 2007.

However, the following circumstances, which can be seen by the respective descriptions of Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1 to 6, and 22 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings, i.e., the plaintiff's business of wholesaleing grain in D or E's trade name, and the defendant purchased rice in F's trade name and sells white rice.

arrow