logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원안동지원 2017.11.08 2017가단2830
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff asserted that on September 4, 2001, the plaintiff lent KRW 50 million to the defendant B at the rate of 12% per annum on February 24, 2002, and thereafter extended the due date on March 8, 2005 until March 8, 2009. Since the defendant C guaranteed the obligation to return the principal and interest of the defendant B's above loan, the defendant C is jointly and severally liable to pay the plaintiff the amount of KRW 50 million and the interest accrued thereon or delay delay damages.

2. On the Plaintiff’s above assertion, the Defendants asserted that the statute of limitations has expired.

The extinctive prescription of a claim arising from a scambling and commercial activity shall expire unless it is exercised for five years (Article 64 of the Commercial Act); the act performed by a merchant for business purposes shall be deemed a commercial activity (Article 47(1) of the Commercial Act); the act of a merchant shall be presumed to be done for

(Article 47(2) of the Commercial Act. In addition, since a person who prepares for a business prior to commencement of a commercial activity which is the object of the business has realized an intention to engage in a commercial activity for the business, the person who prepares for the business is qualified as a merchant at the time of the preparation, and the preparation for the opening of the business is an act for the business, and the first auxiliary commercial activity is an act for the purpose of the business. Although such preparation for opening of the business is not necessarily necessary to indicate the business intention generally and externally through the trade name registration, the trade name, advertisement, or the display of signboards, etc., but if the other party can objectively recognize the intention of the business in view of the nature

In addition, the act of borrowing business funds cannot be viewed as the act of preparing commercial activities which are the object of business in view of the nature of the act itself, but the subjective intent of the actor was the act of preparing for business and the other party was also aware that the act was the act of preparing for business.

arrow