(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.10.27 2015가단12912

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) 서울남부지방법원 2015.10.27 2015가단12912

대여금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 80,000 and KRW 20,000 out of the above money to the Plaintiff shall be KRW 20 million from June 2, 2012, and KRW 20 million.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 2 of the evidence No. 1.1.

The Plaintiff deposited KRW 95 million in the Defendant’s name account around March 31, 2010.

B. Around June 1, 2011, the Defendant prepared a document (Evidence A 2) stating that “A shall bear the intentional responsibility for KRW 100,000,000 without any superior relationship with Ghana, and shall pay 20,000,000 each year according to the economic ability without interest.”

2. On May 26, 2015, the Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is liable to pay KRW 100 million and delay damages to the Plaintiff by losing the benefit of time, as the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to terminate the monetary loan agreement on May 26, 2015, by failing to perform the installment payment agreement.

Although the Plaintiff asserted that the contract for a loan for consumption was terminated, the Defendant simultaneously claims that the installment payment agreement was made by the Defendant, and the Plaintiff appears not to be a legal expert, and thus, it appears that the legal act is not capable of distinguishing it from the legal act, etc., in light of the fact that the above assertion contains a claim for payment of money under the agreement, and according to the content acknowledged in the facts of the foundation, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 80 million, which has already been due under the installment payment agreement dated June 1, 201, to the Plaintiff.

However, with respect to the remaining 20 million won for which the deadline has not yet arrived, the deadline under the agreement is presumed to be for the benefit of the debtor (Article 153(1) of the Civil Act), there is no assertion or proof to acknowledge that the plaintiff and the defendant agreed on the special agreement for the loss of the benefit of time, and there is no other assertion to recognize the reason for the loss of the benefit of time (e.g., Article 388 of the Civil Act). Thus, the plaintiff's assertion that the benefit of time has been lost is greater

참조조문

-민법 제153조 제1항

-민법 제388조

유사 판례

-수원지방법원여주지원 2014.04.24 2013가단7174

-대구지방법원 2015.11.26 2015나11999

-수원지방법원 2014.11.27 2014나18374

-서울서부지방법원 2015.06.05 2014가합36139

-청주지방법원 2019.04.26 2018가단8873