(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.01.20 2014가합12037

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) 부산지방법원 2015.01.20 2014가합12037

대여금 등

Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendants are the legal couple married in around 2011, and the Plaintiff is the father and the father of Defendant C, and the baby of Defendant B.

B. On January 10, 201, the Defendants: (a) on January 10, 201, the Plaintiff: (b) registered the ownership transfer for each of the shares of 1/2 shares in the name of Defendant C and Nonparty E; and (c) on August 13, 201, the ownership transfer registration was completed for each of the shares of 1/2 shares in the instant apartment after marriage; (d) on August 13, 201, the ownership transfer registration was completed for each of the shares of 1/2 shares in the name of E in the name of Defendant B.

C. The Defendants experienced in combustibility due to Defendant C’s waste walls, unfaithful family life, etc. from February 10, 2013, and began to move back to the country after leaving the instant apartment from February 10, 2013.

Since June 27, 2014, Defendant B has been liquidated and has returned to friendly relationship. However, Defendant C is missing until now.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 6 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)

(2) 【Each entry】

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. On December 18, 2012, the Plaintiff, without interest, lent KRW 171,00,000 to Defendant B, who was saw as of December 18, 2012, as the purchase fund of E shares among the instant apartment, with the due date set on July 30, 2017. In this regard, Defendant B, as the disposal document, borrowed money (Evidence 4-1; hereinafter “the instant borrowed money”).

(2) The Plaintiff, who was aware of the fact that the Plaintiff had been voluntarily auctioned on the apartment of this case, requested the Defendant B to repay the above loan, but the Defendant B did not return the loan, thereby seeking the return of the above loan. (2) The Plaintiff did not have received money from the Plaintiff.

The loan certificate of this case is forged.

B. First of all, Defendant B’s certificate of the loan of this case.

유사 판례

-서울북부지방법원 2017.08.24 2016가합26635

-전주지방법원 2013.12.27 2013가단4380

-창원지방법원 2015.11.18 2014나13222

-의정부지방법원 2018.08.23 2017가단135969

-울산지방법원 2017.04.18 2015가단29922