logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.12.08 2017가단203070
청구이의
Text

1. The defendant's compulsory execution against the plaintiff in this court 2016 tea 1492 is denied.

2.This judgment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 26, 2016, the Defendant filed a payment order against the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s wife C under this court’s 2016 tea1492 and issued the payment order, and the payment order became final and conclusive on June 1, 2016.

(hereinafter referred to as the "payment order of this case").

The grounds for filing the instant payment order are as follows: “The Defendant lent KRW 6.5 million to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s wife C on December 8, 2015, and the Plaintiff and C prepared and delivered a promissory note with a face value of KRW 6.5 million to the Defendant on the same day (hereinafter “instant promissory note”).”

C. On December 6, 2016, the instant payment order was issued by the Defendant with the title to execute the instant payment order and filed a claim for the seizure and collection order of the claim in this court.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff did not borrow money from the Defendant, and there is no fact that a promissory note was prepared and delivered. 2) The Plaintiff jointly issued the instant promissory note to the Defendant. (B) The Plaintiff, as a co-user, should pay the instant loan to the Defendant as a co-user.

C) Even if the Plaintiff is not a common borrower, as the Plaintiff’s wife borrowed KRW 6.5 million from the Defendant as a household loan, the Plaintiff’s wife is jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 832 (Joint and Several Liability for Obligations with respect to Home Affairs) of the Civil Act. Moreover, even if the instant borrowing act exceeded the scope of the ordinary household loan, the Plaintiff shall be held liable for ratification of the instant borrowing act.

B. Each of the statements Nos. 1 and 3 and the testimony of the witness C are alone made by the Plaintiff, whether the Plaintiff jointly issued the Promissory Notes, and ② the Plaintiff.

arrow