logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.12.10 2020가단112880
대여금
Text

1. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed to the Plaintiff A, KRW 34,285,714, KRW 22,857,143, KRW 22,857,143, and KRW 22,857, and KRW 143, respectively.

Reasons

1. Upon the request of the Defendants to lend money from the Defendants, the DeterminationF on the cause of the claim: (a) lent money to the Defendants; (b) lent KRW 60 million on June 28, 2010; and (c) around June 21, 2013; and (c) the Defendants agreed to jointly repay the money; (b) the Defendants died on or around March 30, 2018; and (c) Plaintiff A, a wife of F, died on or around March 30, 2018; and (d) succeeded to F by Plaintiff B and C, a wife of F, by two-seven shares; or (e) the purport of each of the arguments set forth in the evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including the serial number).

Thus, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the plaintiff A 34,285,714 won, the plaintiff B, and C 22,857,143 won, and each of the above amounts to the plaintiff B and C at the rate of 12% per annum from June 20, 2020 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case.

2. The Defendants asserted that the Defendants paid the total of KRW 15 million on January 10, 2017 and KRW 13 million on December 16, 2017.

According to the statement of evidence Nos. 1 and 1, the fact that Defendant E remitted to F the amount of KRW 13 million on January 10, 2017, and KRW 2 million on December 16, 2017 is recognized.

However, according to the evidence evidence No. 6, F can be acknowledged to have remitted the money of KRW 22 million to Defendant D separately from the instant loan on May 3, 2013. In full view of the above facts and the fact that the Defendant asserted that the said money was repaid was paid in the name of repayment for KRW 22 million, it is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendants paid KRW 15 million out of the instant loan solely on the basis of the facts acknowledged earlier, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

3. The plaintiffs' claims for conclusion are accepted on the grounds of all the reasons, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow