logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.11.28 2017나34886
대여금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following '2. Additional Judgment' as to the assertion that the defendant emphasizes or adds to this court, and thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. Additional determination

A. In full view of the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff was not a loan to the Defendant, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 45 million to C to an account opened in the name of C (hereinafter “C”) on December 26, 2013, and indicated that the Plaintiff was B (C). The Plaintiff transferred the Plaintiff’s message of KRW 10 million on December 27, 2013 and KRW 5 million on December 30, 2013 to the Defendant, and the Defendant sent the message of KRW 45 million to the Defendant from around 19:45 on December 27, 2013 to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff sent the message of KRW 30 million to the Defendant that the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant at around 28:0,000 on the same day, and the Plaintiff sent the message of KRW 30,000 to the Defendant on December 27, 2013.

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's argument.

B. The defendant's assertion that he paid KRW 30 million to the plaintiff in cash is that the defendant paid additional KRW 30 million to the plaintiff, but there is no evidence to acknowledge the above assertion, and this part of the defendant's assertion is not acceptable.

C. The Defendant’s assertion that there is no obligation to return as illegal consideration means that “the Plaintiff paid gambling money to the Defendant, which constitutes illegal consideration, and this constitutes an illegal consideration, and thus does not have any obligation to return it.”

arrow