(영문) 청주지방법원 2020.01.17 2019나587 | 리걸엔진

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) 청주지방법원 2020.01.17 2019나587

대여금 등

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the head of the vehicle support team and the director of an incorporated association C (hereinafter “Council”), and the Defendant is the chairperson of the Council and the representative of D (hereinafter “D”).

B. The Plaintiff transferred the Defendant a sum of KRW 19,121,889, as follows, from November 23, 2016 to May 23, 2018 due to the personal funds and the operation of the Council and D, upon the parents with the Defendant.

[Attachment 1] On November 23, 2016, 100 5,00,000 on November 24, 2016, 2016, 5,000,000 3,000 on January 25, 2017, 200 4.1,00,000 5,00,00 on January 25, 2017, 200 5,00 on May 24, 2017, 200 6:

C. The Plaintiff is a person who received reimbursement from the Defendant in the amount of KRW 5,828,00 out of KRW 19,121,889.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 10 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that part of the money remitted by the Plaintiff is not a loan, but a council or a support fund for D, and that part of the money has been repaid in addition to a loan that the Plaintiff was repaid.

3. Determination

A. As to the assertion of support payments, the Defendant alleged that part of the amount remitted by the Plaintiff is a support payment that is not a loan, and that there is no obligation to repay. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the claim.

In addition, upon examining the Defendant’s written response on May 30, 2019 submitted by the Defendant, it stated that “I am dynasty that I will do so by dividing it in the year 2018 at the time of the Jeju Island,” and even according to the Defendant’s argument, if it appears that I would have repaid the support, the money that the Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant is expected to be repaid to the Defendant.

This part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

(b) a defense of partial performance.

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 2020.01.17 2019나587

-수원지방법원 2015.11.20 2014가합72978

-서울남부지방법원 2018.08.16 2016가단241526

-광주지방법원 2018.11.28 2017가단520852

-창원지방법원 2018.11.29 2017가합53807