logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2019.08.14 2019가단3867
약정금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

가. 원고와 피고는 2009. 6. 원고가 5,000만 원을 투자하고 피고 명의로 사업자등록을 내어 쑥뜸방을 공동 운영하기로 약정하여, 2009. 8. 22.부터 울산 남구 C에서 “D”이라는 상호로 찜질방을 공동으로 운영하였다

(hereinafter “instant partnership business”). (b)

On September 15, 2009, the Plaintiff, while withdrawing from the partnership relationship of the instant case, was paid KRW 50 million by the Defendant. On the same day, the Plaintiff agreed that the Defendant would borrow KRW 50 million from the Plaintiff on September 15, 201, with the due date set at 2% of the interest month.

(hereinafter “instant settlement agreement”). C.

The defendant operated the above D independently, and closed the business on June 20, 2015.

[Judgment of the court below] The ground for recognition is without merit, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The Plaintiff agreed to withdraw from the partnership relationship of this case and borrow KRW 50 million between the Defendant and the Defendant. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 50 million. Since the Plaintiff’s claim for the borrowed money against the Defendant is a general civil liability, the ten-year statute of limitations is applicable. Thus, the statute of limitations has not yet expired.

B. The Defendant’s above-mentioned KRW 50 million claim is a commercial claim because it is a claim between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, which is a merchant, and the prescription period of five years has expired since the due date.

3. In the judgment of the court, the light or quasi-loan for consumption is identical to that of a contract extinguishing an existing obligation and establishing a new obligation. However, in the case of a pit, it is not identical with the existing obligation, while in the case of a quasi-loan for consumption, it is not identical in principle, and in the case of a quasi-loan for consumption, the parties to the existing obligation and the obligation agree to make the object of the loan for consumption.

arrow