logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 김천지원 2018.09.20 2018가단2734
양수금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay 35,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 30% per annum from October 1, 2007 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Article 1 of the Basic Facts

1. Date on which an obligation occurs: On August 1, 2007, the kinds of obligations: Loans borrowed;

1. Debt amount: 35,00,000 won (the time limit and method of performance) due shall be payable until August 30, 2009;

(Method of Performance) From September 2007 to July 2009, to make installment payments of KRW 500,000 on the 30th day of each month, and to make installment payments of KRW 23,500,000 on August 30, 209.

Article 3 (Interest) The rate shall be paid monthly at the rate of % per annum.

Article 5 (Amount of Damages for Delay) If the debtor delays the repayment of the above amount, damages for delay shall be paid to the creditor at the rate of 30% per annum to the delayed amount.

Article 6 (Loss of Maturity) If an obligor falls under any of the following subparagraphs, he shall, as a matter of course, lose the benefit of time for the obligation above, and immediately repay all of the remainder of the obligation, even without any notification or peremptory notice from the obligee:

3. A creditor who has delayed the payment of the funds and the payment in installments by the debtor once: B

A. The Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Defendant for fraud in relation to the fact that the Defendant had the Plaintiff lent money to a third party. The Plaintiff, upon entering into an agreement on the said fraud case with the Defendant, prepared the following notarial deeds by designating C, which was known to the Defendant, as the obligee.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant notarial deed”). (b)

The Defendant did not perform the instant notarial deed, and C intended to collect claims against the Defendant on July 8, 2008 by obtaining a decision to seize and collect a collection order (Seoul District Court Decision 2008 Malcheon Branch Kim 1302), but did not collect claims due to the lack of deposit claims.

C. On July 10, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with C for the transfer of bonds based on the Notarial Deed, and C notified the Defendant of the fact of the transfer of bonds on the same day.

[Identification Evidence] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination.

arrow