logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2021.01.19 2018가단100028
대여금
Text

1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. Between May 18, 2017 and September 4, 2019, in collaboration with C, KRW 50,000,000 as well as for this.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around July 2014, the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 40,00,000 in total, KRW 47,000,00 in total, KRW 47,000 in total, KRW 47,000 in total, KRW 47,000 in total, KRW 17,000 in total, on the same ground as the method of committing each crime in the separate crime list from November 29, 2014 to April 6, 2015, to the Defendant, among the Defendant, who was fully aware of the fact that he had come to know of the Defendant at the Egympia association, around November 29, 2014.

2) On June 27, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the Defendant with the knowledge that the said lending and the Defendant filed a false statement, and the Defendant was indicted for fraud that acquired each of the above money by fraud, and was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for five months at the Seoul Northern District Court. The appeal and final appeal were all dismissed.

B. The Defendant is worth KRW 6,000,000,000 to the Plaintiff on January 2015, 2015, for the first time, the Plaintiff, who was a member of D company, who was a member of D company in the Sa system, to carry on the business of growing trees in E.

He is in charge of the authorization work for the swimming business and received KRW 200,000,00 in return for processing the authorization.

At present, 80,000,000 won including interest from July 1, 2015 to December 2015, is to pay 80,000,000 won including interest from D if it is paid with money from D when it is necessary to lend money to the expenses required for the business of authorization for stock farms.

“.....”

However, in fact, the defendant thought that the above 70,000,000 won should be used for his own stock investment, but did not intend to use the above 40,000 won as a cost for the business of authorization for the stock farm business. Since the authorization for the stock farm business was uncertain, there was no intention or ability to repay the principal and interest of the above loan to the plaintiff until the agreed date.

2) On January 7, 2015, the Plaintiff delivered KRW 70,000,000 to the Defendant for KRW 10,000,000 in total, and the Defendant used most of the said money for stock investments.

3) The Plaintiff’s above.

arrow