(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.03.31 2015가단10328

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) 서울서부지방법원 2016.03.31 2015가단10328

대여금반환

Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found in view of the absence of dispute between the parties or the overall purport of arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 4, 11, and 17 (including paper numbers), and the witness D, E, and F’s testimony, and the entire purport of arguments in this Court.

E is the friendship of Defendant B F, the words of Defendant B.

B. On November 4, 2007, E loaned KRW 35,000,00 (hereinafter “instant loan”) to Defendant B, the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 20,000,000 by March 3, 2008, and the remainder shall be repaid in installments, and the interest shall be paid on the 30th day of each month.

At this time, Defendant C, the father of Defendant B, guaranteed the Plaintiff’s debt of the instant loan.

C. Defendant B joined the limit operated by D on March 10, 2008, and had D transfer KRW 20,000 to F. The Defendants paid KRW 38,35,000 to F during the period from December 28, 2007 to July 28, 2009.

E did not urge the Defendants to pay the instant loan, and on November 23, 2014, Defendant B urged Defendant B to pay the original loan by sending the original copy of the loan to a mobile phone text message, but Defendant B responded to the “slured sound.”

E. On January 27, 2015, E notified the Defendants of the claim for the repayment of the instant loan.

F. On February 2, 2015, E transferred the instant loan claim to the Plaintiff, a business partner, and notified the Defendants of the assignment of the said claim on the same day.

G. On February 3, 2015, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendants claiming the repayment of the instant loan.

H. On November 19, 2015, F testified that “The Defendant was present as a witness on the date for pleading of the instant lawsuit and testified that “The Defendant voluntarily consumed to the Plaintiff the money he/she remitted to pay the instant loan to the Plaintiff.”

2. The Plaintiff is the assignee of the instant claim regarding the Defendants’ main defense.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2013.09.06 2013가합33527

-서울서부지방법원 2017.10.25 2016가단247394

-창원지방법원 2019.01.24 2018나55279

-서울서부지방법원 2017.10.25 2015가단225298

-부산지방법원동부지원 2016.09.28 2016가단200004