logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.04.28 2015나36710
대여금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, Paragraph 1 of this Article is applicable.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. From the end of September 2008, the Defendant sent the Plaintiff the property of KRW 200 billion to the United Kingdom (U.S.) with “Jari-do” located in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government I, the Defendant received money from the Plaintiff. The payment of KRW 14 billion is paid as the down payment and the intermediate payment to purchase the KG building (hereinafter “instant commercial building”). The remainder of KRW 5.5 billion should be paid. The Plaintiff promised to make the bond of KRW 10 billion available to the instant commercial building as security. If the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 10 billion, the purchase price of the instant house owned by Jongno-gu as of September 8, 2008 is paid to the Plaintiff. The payment of KRW 1.5 billion is made to the Plaintiff, and the purchase price of the instant house owned by Jongno-gu, Seoul as of KRW 1.5 billion (hereinafter “the purchase price of the instant house”).

B. After that, between the first patrol officer of October 2008 and the first patrol officer of November 2008, the Defendant stated that “the remainder of the instant commercial building has not been paid, but the Plaintiff is the president as a bond company who is well aware of it in the name of Dong and Dong,” and that “the person who introduced the division would allow 100 million won to use the instant commercial building within one week as collateral,” and that the person who introduced the division would allow 200 million won to use the instant house as collateral. On the other hand, on the other hand, 200 million won to receive loans as collateral for the instant commercial building.”

C. In fact, the defendant did not have had property of KRW 200 billion from the Republic of Korea located in the United States, and there is no fact that the defendant entered into a contract with the owner of the commercial building of this case to purchase the commercial building of this case at KRW 21 billion with the owner of the commercial building of this case, and it is on the side of "Ssung Construction Co., Ltd.".

arrow