(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.11.06 2014가단22086

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.11.06 2014가단22086

대여금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff entered into a loan transaction agreement with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) on May 13, 2008, with the content that the loan was consolidated into the D Credit Union on December 10, 2014, and the name of D Credit Union was changed to Bcredit Union on the same day before and after the merger; hereinafter “the Plaintiff was at issue”) to the effect that the loan was terminated by the Defendant on May 13, 2008; the interest rate was at a variable rate of 150,000,000 won at a rate of 18% per annum; and the compensation rate for delay was at a rate of 150,000,000 won at a rate of 150,000,000 won at a joint security interest rate of 150,000,000 won against the Defendant and the Plaintiff’s loan to E, set the maximum debt amount as KRW 6,051, G1,000,030,000.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 5, Eul evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of recognition of the cause of claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the principal, interest, and delay damages under the loan agreement of this case to the plaintiff, except in extenuating circumstances.

3. Determination of nullity defenses due to false conspiracys

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the instant loan contract was concluded under the name of the Defendant by lending the name of the loan to H, and the actual obligor is H, and the Plaintiff also entered into the instant loan contract under the name of the Defendant, notwithstanding the fact that the actual obligor was H in order to avoid the limit of the same person’s loan to H. Thus, the instant loan contract is null and void as a false declaration of agreement.

B. (i) In order to establish a false declaration of agreement, there is a difference between the truth and the indication of the declaration of intention and an agreement between the other party as to the inconsistency. If a third party directly signed and sealed the loan-related documents, such as a letter of loan for consumption, as the principal debtor or the joint guarantor, the third party himself.

유사 판례

-대법원 2014.12.18 2014다207092

-광주지방법원 2019.05.10 2018가단505270

-의정부지방법원 2018.05.31 2018나200908

-대구지방법원 2021.02.17 2020가단12605

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.05.23 2017가단7149