logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2014.12.18 2013나9420
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 basic facts are the apartment of this case, which the defendant purchased from F on March 5, 2007 from F, "No. 106 Dong-dong G apartment No. 6112 et al.".

Of the purchase price of KRW 370,000,000, the sum of KRW 37,000,000 and the intermediate payment of KRW 50,000 in lieu of the Plaintiff, and the fact that the Defendant lent it to the Defendant without setting the interest and the due date, is not a dispute between the parties.

2. Determination

A. If so, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above loan amount of KRW 87,000,000 and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) From 2007 to 2009, approximately KRW 89,000,000 in the aggregate of the items indicated in the Defendant’s Busan Bank passbook (Account Number: J) transaction statement, and KRW 20,000 in the first instance trial codefendant B (hereinafter “B”).

(2) The court below's order to submit financial transaction information to Busan Bank Co., Ltd. on the part of the defendant's name is insufficient to recognize that the amount of money in the above Busan Bank's name was transferred to the Busan Bank's account and used to repay the above borrowed money, or that Eul paid the above borrowed money with other money. Thus, the court below's order to submit financial transaction information on the Busan Bank's Co., Ltd. on July 31, 2009 to the above Busan Bank's account is insufficient to recognize that the above amount was used to repay the borrowed money, or that the above borrowed money was used to repay the borrowed money with other money. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit, since the court below received from Busan Bank's bank on July 31, 2009, KRW 50,000 from the Busan Bank on July 31, 200 and stated the above amount to the plaintiff on Sep. 10, 2000.

arrow