logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.05.20 2019나66158
대여금
Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 20,000,000 and this shall apply to the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 4, 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) determined 10,000,000 to the Defendant as interest rate of 3% per month; and (b) lent the amount to the Defendant’s account under the name of Codefendant C in the first instance trial, a wife of the Defendant.

(2) On March 2, 2012, the Plaintiff lent KRW 10,00,00 to the account under the name of Nonparty D, who introduced money lending between the Plaintiff and the Defendant at the Defendant’s request, KRW 8,50,000 after deducting KRW 90,000 for a three-month-paid interest and KRW 600,00 for a two-month-paid loan from the Defendant on January 4, 2012, and transferred KRW 8,50,000 for each of the above 3-month-paid interest and KRW 8,50,000 for a two-month-paid interest and KRW 60,00 for a two-month-paid loan from the Defendant. D transferred money to the account under the name of the Defendant’s wife (the Defendant’s wife’s wife’s KRW 50,000,000; KRW 20,000 for a 30,010,000 for each of the 30,010.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 30% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from July 31, 2013 to May 13, 2019, the delivery date of a copy of the instant complaint, as claimed by the Plaintiff, from July 31, 2013 to July 13, 2019, and from the following day to the day of full payment.

The instant lawsuit was filed after about seven years have elapsed since the instant first and second loans, and the loan certificate was not prepared with respect to the instant first and second loans, and the Plaintiff’s funds were not directly transferred to the Defendant’s account.

However, in full view of the aforementioned facts and the purport of the entire arguments, the Plaintiff’s funds directly or upon the Defendant’s request.

arrow