(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.11.24 2016나304452

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) 대구지방법원 2016.11.24 2016나304452

대여금

Text

1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

Defendant (Appointed Party) and Appointed Party B are networked to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 13, 2015, the Plaintiff lent KRW 18,000,00 to the deceased C (hereinafter “the deceased”) at the interest rate of 20.40% per annum, 48 months during the lending period, and 29% per annum. The Deceased lost its interest on the said lending obligation due to the failure of the deceased to pay the principal and interest on the said lending obligation on July 7, 2015.

B. The principal and interest of the instant loan obligations as of July 7, 2015 (hereinafter “instant principal and interest”) are KRW 18,593,924 in total ( principal KRW 17,730,097 interest of KRW 808,856 for delay damages of KRW 54,971).

C. On August 31, 2015, the Deceased died, and the legal heir is the Defendant and B, who is the parent of the Deceased, and the legal share of inheritance is one half, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant and B are obligated to pay each of the damages for delay at the rate of 29% per annum from July 8, 2015 to the date of full payment, with respect to KRW 9,296,962 (the principal and interest of this case 18,593,924 x statutory inheritance 1/2) and KRW 8,865,048 (the principal 17,730,097 x statutory inheritance 1/2).

3. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant asserted to the effect that the Plaintiff’s claim is groundless since he/she made a qualified acceptance on the deceased’s inheritance obligation, and according to the statement in the evidence No. 1, the Defendant and B filed an application for approval of the inheritance limit with the Suwon District Court 2015 Madan1738, May 2, 2016, and the above court rendered a decision to accept the above inheritance limit application on the grounds that the Defendant and B are obliged to pay the above loan within the scope of the property inherited from the deceased.

I would like to say.

Therefore, the defendant's argument is justified within the above scope of recognition.

4. Thus, the defendant and B shall be the scope of the property inherited from the deceased to the plaintiff.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2015.09.15 2015가단31809

-부산지방법원 2015.11.17 2015가단42366

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.17 2016나59609

-창원지방법원마산지원 2019.09.04 2017가단107226

-광주지방법원목포지원 2015.11.27 2015가단4854