(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.01.16 2014가단16835

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.01.16 2014가단16835

대여금

Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 35,00,000 and 5% per annum from September 19, 2014 to January 16, 2015.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around January 201, Defendant B repeatedly borrowed and repaid money several times, including borrowing KRW 20 million from the Plaintiff and repayment of the loan around that time. Of these, Defendant B agreed to pay KRW 20 million, including KRW 15 million as of August 28, 201 and KRW 5 million as of September 30, 201, and agreed to pay KRW 13 months each time from October 201 to December 30, 201. In addition, on March 30, 2012, Defendant B agreed to separately determine the remainder of the loan debt of KRW 30 million as of March 30, 201 and pay interest on KRW 6 million each month.

B. After that, Defendant B repeatedly borrowed and repaid money from the Plaintiff, and on March 18, 2014, Defendant B borrowed KRW 35 million from the Plaintiff again on March 18, 2014, and thereafter, borrowed money from March 18, 2014.

9. up to 18.18:

Provided, That the commitments shall be observed up to April of the month in the amount of KRW 2.7 million per month;

“The loan certificate(A No. 2, hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) was prepared, and Defendant C, the husband of Defendant B, signed the loan certificate of this case as the guarantor.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. (1) The interpretation of an expression of intent to pay a contract amount clearly establishes the objective meaning that the parties have given to the act of expression. In a case where the contents of a contract are written in writing as a disposal document, the objective meaning that the parties have given to the act of expression in writing, regardless of the party’s internal intent, shall be reasonably interpreted regardless of the party’s internal intent. In such a case, if the objective meaning of the text is clear, the existence and content of the expression of intent shall be acknowledged as stated in the text, barring any special circumstances.

Supreme Court Decision 2012Da4471 Decided November 29, 2012

유사 판례

-대구지방법원상주지원 2014.05.14 2013가단1975

-춘천지방법원 2019.10.30 2019나50622

-부산지방법원 2015.07.23 2015가단16343

-울산지방법원 2015.10.28 2014가합5643

-전주지방법원 2014.10.14 2013나13934