logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.17 2015가단5219675
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim and the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s counterclaim are all dismissed.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit.

Reasons

1. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that around May 31, 2013, the Defendant: (a) demanded that the Plaintiff lend KRW 90,000,000 to the Plaintiff for the purchase of the land located in Chuncheon; and (b) the Plaintiff lent KRW 80,000,000 in total from May 31, 2013 to March 13, 2014 without fixing the due date; (c) thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the interest for delay as well as the interest for delay.

B. According to each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 2 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 2-1, the plaintiff paid each of the costs to the defendant on March 4, 2013, 50,000,000 won on May 31, 2013, and 10,000,000 won on July 8, 2013, but the plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff paid 22,00,000,000 won to the defendant on March 13, 2014. However, according to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1-3 (written passbook), the beneficiary's name is freely stated, and the defendant denies the receipt of the above money, and it is difficult to recognize it.

It is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that there was an agreement to return the money paid as above to the defendant as the money lent to the defendant by only the statements and witness C and D of Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 8 (including paper numbers), and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise. Thus, the plaintiff's claim on the principal lawsuit is without merit.

[No. 2-1] The Defendant’s payment of money from the Plaintiff on February 25, 2013 (hereinafter “E land”) is deemed to have been KRW 2,990,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

Since it is recognized that F purchased money from F, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant borrowed money from the Plaintiff to purchase the said land is difficult to believe. 2. Determination on the counterclaim claim

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff purchased from the Defendant for KRW 90,000,000,000 of the G, which was divided from the land E in Chuncheon City, G prior to G, which was divided into the land E, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 80,000,000 out of the purchase price, and did not pay the remainder of KRW 10,00,000,000, and the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the said G land is also accepted.

arrow