(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.03.28 2018나1610 | 리걸엔진

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 2019.03.28 2018나1610

대여금

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserts that, on June 30, 2007, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 and the delay damages therefrom, since the Plaintiff leased KRW 100,000 to the Defendant and C by the due date set on June 30, 2008.

According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and the whole pleadings, it is recognized that the defendant and Eul set up and delivered a loan certificate with the purport of borrowing KRW 100,000,000 to the plaintiff on June 30, 2007 (hereinafter "the loan certificate of this case") by fixing the loan interest rate of KRW 100,000 to June 30, 2008 (hereinafter "the loan certificate of this case").

In the event that multiple parties become joint debtors under the Civil Act, in principle, in the absence of any special declaration of intention, multiple debtors bear the installment obligations. Thus, according to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 50,000,000 won (=10,000,000 won x 1/2) out of the loan funds based on the loan certificate of this case, barring any special circumstance.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant's assertion that the defendant did not borrow money from the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff was forced to use the amount of KRW 121,380,692 for retirement intermediate settlement and KRW 25,364,617 for retirement intermediate settlement, and the amount of KRW 25,364,617 for retirement intermediate settlement, and that the plaintiff was made false by requesting the defendant and C to prepare the loan certificate in order to show this to the wife.

B. In full view of the following circumstances, the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the instant loan certificate was made by falsity, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the defendant's argument is without merit.

① The Defendant shall file a civil suit with the investigative agency based on the false loan certificate of this case.

참조조문

-민법

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2017.01.24 2016나2042631

-창원지방법원진주지원 2019.01.25 2017가단36402

-부산지방법원 동부지원 2017.01.25 2016가단204075

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.06.22 2017가단8264

-서울고등법원 2017.06.30 2016나2076832