logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2014.07.18 2012가단48551 (1)
대여금등
Text

1. The Defendants jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff KRW 70,500,000 and the Defendants B from July 26, 201 to November 12, 2012.

Reasons

1. Claim against the defendant B

A. The Plaintiff indicated the claim has lent KRW 150 million to Defendant C as of July 25, 201 with the date of repayment set as of July 25, 201, and Defendant B and D jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan obligations of Defendant C. Since Defendant C repaid only KRW 79.5 million out of the principal and interest of the loan, Defendant B, as a joint and several surety, is liable to pay the loan principal of KRW 70.5 million and damages for delay that the Defendants have yet to pay.

(b) Judicial confession based on recognition;

2. Claim against Defendant C and D

A. The summary of the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim was determined as of July 25, 201 by the date of repayment to Defendant C, and the Plaintiff lent KRW 150 million to Defendant C, and Defendant B and D jointly guaranteed the above loan obligations of Defendant C. Since Defendant C paid only KRW 79.5 million out of the loan principal and interest, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the loan principal amounting to KRW 70.5 million and delay damages.

B. Defendant C and D asserted to the effect that the instant lawsuit was unlawful as it was filed in violation of the agreement to institute a lawsuit against the Defendants. As such, the health belt, the fact that the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the said Defendants with the investigative agency to the effect that the said Defendants do not want to be punished by the said Defendants during the investigation, is as follows, however, it is difficult to view it as an agreement to institute a lawsuit against the said Defendants, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff agreed not to institute a civil lawsuit with the said Defendants, and thus, the Defendants’ assertion in this part

다. 본안에 대한 판단 ⑴ 인정사실 ㈎ 원고는 부동산 투자 개발업 등을 영위하는 회사이고, 피고 C과 D은 남매지간이며, 피고 B은 피고 C, D과 동업하던 사이이다.

㈏ 원고의 대표이사인 E는 피고 B으로부터 피고 C을 소개 받아 위 피고로부터 금전을 빌려주면 10일 이내로...

arrow