logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.06.19 2018나12053
어음금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the conclusion of the judgment of the court of first instance regarding this case are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the defendant added the following ‘2. Additional determination' as to the assertion added in the trial of the court of first instance, and thus, they are quoted as it is by the main sentence of Article 420

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendant’s gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that even if the Plaintiff’s claim for agreed amount exists, the period of five years shall apply to commercial claims. The instant lawsuit was filed on August 29, 2016, which was five years after the date on which the said agreed amount claim was created, and thus, the said agreed amount claim expired by prescription.

B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the evidence and the purport of the entire argument as seen earlier, i.e., ① even if the Plaintiff, the representative of F Co., Ltd., a real estate development company, requested a loan brokerage for the purpose of real estate business financing, the agreed money claims in this case cannot be deemed as a business activity or a business activity because the Plaintiff agreed to return the money delivered between the Defendant and C, rather than the Plaintiff’s payment of the money, and thus cannot be deemed as a business activity or a business activity. ② The Plaintiff and the Defendant cannot be deemed as a claim having substantial identity with the original claim; ② the Plaintiff’s delivery of money to the Defendant and C in this case, the Plaintiff’s delivery of money to the Defendant and the Defendant, the Plaintiff’s delivery of money to the Defendant, and the Defendant’s delivery of money was not presumed as an auxiliary commercial activity in Article 47 of the Commercial Act; ③ The merchant is a person with the right and duty arising from a commercial activity, and even if the company is deemed as a merchant under the Commercial Act, the representative director of the company is not a

arrow