(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.07.12 2016나55291

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) 광주지방법원 2017.07.12 2016나55291

양수금

Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. On March 16, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) from C on June 23, 2008, the Plaintiff was transferred a loan claim of KRW 100 million (payment period June 23, 2012) based on the loan certificate (hereinafter “the loan certificate”) against the Defendant; (b) and (c) notified the Defendant on March 17, 2015, the Plaintiff was obligated to pay the Plaintiff the transfer amount of KRW 100 million and damages for delay.

B. On June 3, 2008, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant obtained title trust from Company D (hereinafter “instant company”) with the content of selling the said real estate in the form of KRW 210 million to the said Company, when cancelling the title trust, the Defendant prepared a sales contract with the content of selling the said real estate in the form of KRW 210 million to the said Company.

In addition, the defendant separately borrowed KRW 100 million from the company of this case, and in the process, he borrowed the balance under the above sales contract and received KRW 100 million, and according to the agreement with the above company, the defendant prepared the certificate of the loan of this case in the name of non-company C.

Therefore, the actual creditor of the loan against the defendant is the company of this case, and C did not have any right to the defendant, so the plaintiff's claim for the transfer money is without merit.

In addition, the plaintiff is merely a solution of C, and it is not a actual assignment of claim from C.

2. We examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio with respect to the determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit (as seen earlier, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff was merely a resolution agent of C, not the Plaintiff who actually received a claim from C, and the aforementioned assertion appears to the purport that “Inasmuch as the Plaintiff was transferred a claim from C with the main purpose of engaging in litigation, the said assignment of claim constitutes a discretionary litigation trust and is null and void, and the Plaintiff is not a party entitled to file the instant lawsuit.”

relevant legal principles.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2017.04.05 2016가단8926

-대법원 2015.02.12 2013다81248

-서울북부지방법원 2019.01.23 2018가단10286

-서울남부지방법원 2015.11.26 2015가합2059

-청주지방법원 2015.09.18 2015가단3679