(영문) 광주지방법원순천지원 2019.08.29 2018가단79954

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) 광주지방법원순천지원 2019.08.29 2018가단79954

대여금

Text

1. To the extent of the property inherited from the net F, the Plaintiff:

A. Defendant C is 39,036,454 won and 11,193 among them.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 15, 201, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 30 million to the networkF (hereinafter “the deceased”) (hereinafter “the network”). On November 15, 201, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 40,000,000 at the rate of KRW 2.0% per annum on November 15, 201, at the rate of 1.02% per annum, and at the rate of 8.26% per three months or more (hereinafter “first loan”); ② on November 15, 2013, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 40,00,00 per annum at the rate of 2.09% per annum, and at the highest rate of 18% per annum (hereinafter “second loan”); and ③ concluded a credit card use contract on October 22, 2013.

B. As of July 24, 2018, the sum of the principal and interest of the Plaintiff’s respective loans and interest on credit card payments to the Deceased calculated as of July 24, 2018 is KRW 91,085,062 in total (the principal and interest of the first loan, KRW 26,118,168, and KRW 40,000 in total).

C. The Defendants inherited the deceased’s obligation to the deceased’s spouse or children in proportion to 3/7 (Defendant C), 2/7 (Defendant D and E).

The Defendants, on March 26, 2019, filed a report on the inheritance-limited approval with the Gwangju Family Court’s 2019-Ma-Ma322, and received the said report on the qualified acceptance on April 4, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendants are obligated to pay the Plaintiff the principal and interest of the loans and the accrued interest and the obligation of credit card payment to the Plaintiff within the scope of the property inherited from the Deceased, unless there are special circumstances.

As to this, since Defendant C received a offset notice against the deceased on July 23, 2015, the Plaintiff should be deemed to have known the fact that the inheritance obligation exceeds the inherited property at that time. However, the Defendants filed a qualified acceptance report after the lapse of three months thereafter, and the said qualified acceptance is null and void.

We can see the above evidence, Gap evidence, Eul evidence No. 2, Eul evidence No. 3, and the whole purport of arguments.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.22 2015가단5354592

-서울서부지방법원 2017.10.26 2016가단255104

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2018.10.17 2018가단113937

-광주지방법원 2018.07.13 2018가단4937

-울산지방법원 2015.10.16 2015가단55686