logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2021.02.03 2019가합15451
대여금
Text

1. Defendant D:

A. As for KRW 83,571,428 and KRW 51,428,571 among them to Plaintiff A, the Plaintiff’s 83,571,428 and KRW 32,142.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The NetworkF lent Defendant D KRW 10 million on February 10, 2010 and KRW 50 million on March 17, 2010 to Defendant D, and Defendant D, upon completion of the G’s house, agreed to receive H association loan and repay on April 10, 2010.

On March 18, 2010, Defendant E, the wife of Defendant D, drafted a letter of loan with the content that the above KRW 150 million was completed and repaid with H association loans by April 10, 2010.

B. The NetworkF paid to Defendant D KRW 50 million on April 29, 2014, and KRW 25 million on May 29, 2015.

On May 29, 2015, Defendant D drafted a receipt stating that Defendant D may receive KRW 75 million in the purchase price from the Simcheon-si I Apartment-si (hereinafter “I Apartment-si”).

(c)

The networkF died on September 10, 2016, and succeeded to the property of the Plaintiff B and C, who is the wife of the network F, the Plaintiff B and C, who is the wife of the network F.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiffs’ assertion 1) The Network F lent KRW 150 million to Defendant D, and Defendant E drafted a letter of loan, and thus, the Defendants are obliged to make a change to the Plaintiffs, the heir of the networkF.

2) The net F will have Defendant D satisfied the above KRW 150 million as an I apartment.

Defendant D lent KRW 75 million to Defendant D with the purchase price of I apartment, and the substitute was not repaid.

Defendant D borrowed KRW 75 million or obtained unfair profits equivalent to the above amount from the networkF without any legal cause. Thus, the Plaintiff stated that the cause of the claim was changed on August 14, 2020. However, Defendant D also stated in the same document that Defendant D borrowed all of the KRW 25 million received from the networkF including the above KRW 75 million, and thus, it is deemed a selective cause of claim change;

It is necessary to repay the borrowed money to the plaintiffs, who are the successors of the net F, or to return unjust profits.

B. The defendants' assertion 10 million won.

arrow