logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2021.02.10 2020나4842
양수금
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 1,565,00 and its payment from February 12, 2016.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C. (hereinafter “Non-Party Company”) on July 29, 2014: 0. 10,000,000 per annum; 34.9% per annum; and 50,000 per annum on July 29, 2017 (hereinafter “the instant loan contract”); 0. 0. Additional 10.00,000,000 additional loans on August 4, 2010; 0. 0. Additional 10,000,000 additional loans on August 4, 2014; 0. 10,000,000 additional loans on October 6, 2014; 10,000,000 additional loans on October 5, 200, 2014; 10,05,000 additional loans on May 10, 2015.

B. If the Defendant, after the conclusion of the instant loan contract, obtained additional loans and re-loans as follows without preparing a separate contract, compared to the entries in Gap's certificate (B) No. 1 issued by the Plaintiff, the Defendant compared the contents of "written inquiry about the tax credit on deposit money" as stated in Eul's certificate (written confirmation of transaction details) No. 5, the Defendant is accurately consistent with the above B's transaction statement with the amount and date, except for the fact that the details deposited into the above D bank's virtual account are omitted, and the transaction statement as stated in Gap's certificate No. 1 is mechanically recorded in the non-party company or the Plaintiff's electronic computer system, and thus, there is no circumstance to doubt that the content is false, and thus, the Plaintiff actually implemented the loan as alleged by the Plaintiff.

Furthermore, it is reasonable to see E Committee as requested by the defendant.

arrow