logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.07.10 2015나2239
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

Judgment of the first instance.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 11, 2013, the Plaintiff agreed to lend KRW 20 million to C as of October 11, 2013 (hereinafter “instant loan”). On the same day, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 20 million to the Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of the Defendant.

B. Meanwhile, from May 2013 to August 2013, the Plaintiff received KRW 1450,000 monthly payment from the said C as the interest, etc. on the instant loan.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including a case where there is a serial number) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that C is required to lend KRW 20 million to the account in the name of the Defendant designated by C and notified the Defendant of the transfer of the instant loan to the Defendant.

However, in light of the fact that C received a loan with the Defendant’s request for the lending of the above money, and that the above loan was actually used by the Defendant, the Defendant may be deemed as the actual borrower within the scope of KRW 20 million or at least KRW 13.9 million.

Therefore, the defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay the above money to the plaintiff C.

B. We examine the following circumstances: ① the Plaintiff received a certificate of borrowing the instant loan from the Defendant, not the Defendant, and received 1,450,000 won per month from C as interest, etc. for four months; ② the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant used the remainder of KRW 13,90,000,000 for his own interest, excluding the amount of KRW 6,100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won, which was withdrawn as a check and deemed to have been applied for payment by C among the instant loans, but there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant used the loan for his own interest. ③ However, after

arrow