logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2015.01.15 2014다208163
보험금
Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 through 4, based on the facts-finding and legal principles as stated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that, based on the facts-finding and legal principles as indicated in its holding, the instant loan contract cannot be deemed non-existent, and the mere fact that the Jeju Savings Bank borrowed the name of the Plaintiff in order to avoid the limitation under the relevant law, cannot be deemed an unfair legal act solely on the ground that it took out a loan under the name of the Plaintiff, regardless of who is a substantial debtor.

Furthermore, the lower court determined that each of the instant claims against the Defendant was extinguished by offsetting the obligation of the instant loan contract, on the premise that the Plaintiff cannot oppose the Defendant bankruptcy trustee on the ground that the instant loan contract was the false representation of prior agreement, on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant bankruptcy trustee, a third party under Article 108(2) of the Civil Act, was aware of the content of such prior agreement.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable, and it did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules without exhaust all necessary deliberations, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the absence of unfair juristic acts or juristic acts, violation of the principle of trust and good faith, repayment, and set-off under Article 104

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 5, the lower court, despite the Plaintiff’s assertion, that is, the Plaintiff’s request for stock disposal, did not dispose of the shares, which are the collateral, at the time due to the cause attributable to the Plaintiff.

arrow