logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2019.07.18 2018가단9181
현금보관금 반환 청구
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 30,000,000 and its related amount are 5% per annum from October 12, 2018 to July 18, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The plaintiff asserts that on July 19, 2002, the plaintiff paid and lent 20 million won to the defendant in cash and in check, and then remitted 20 million won on the same day to the defendant's deposit account. On March 20, 2003, the plaintiff withdrawn 10 million won in cash from the plaintiff's deposit account in D and paid and lent 10 million won to the defendant. Thus, the defendant is liable to pay 50 million won in total to the plaintiff and delay damages.

The defendant borrowed 30,000,000 won from the plaintiff on July 19, 2002 and 10,000,000 won on March 20, 2003. The defendant repaid 10,140,000 won on a monthly basis from April 2010 to December 2017, and agreed to cover 10,140,000 won on the principal, so the plaintiff's claim exceeding 19,860,000 won on the leased principal is groundless.

2. The facts that the Defendant borrowed the Plaintiff’s total amount of KRW 30,000,000 on July 19, 2002 and KRW 30,000,000 on March 20, 200 do not conflict between the parties. Thus, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the above KRW 30,000,000 and delay damages.

In addition to the above KRW 30,000,000, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant lent KRW 20,000,000 to the Defendant on July 19, 2002 as cash and check. However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, such as the statement of the evidence set forth in subparagraphs 1 through 4, alone, is insufficient to acknowledge the above assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion cannot be accepted.

From April 2010 to December 2017, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff repaid KRW 10,140,000 in total, each of the KRW 100,000,000 per annum, and agreed with the Plaintiff to cover the principal amount (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200, Apr. 1, 2010; 200, Mar. 140, 2000). However, even if the evidence submitted by the Defendant, such as the Plaintiff’s statement of No. 1 to No. 4, was collected, it can be recognized that the Plaintiff paid the total of KRW 10,140,00,

arrow