logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2021.03.25 2020가단573871
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The fact that the Plaintiff, upon receiving a request from the Defendant’s mother C for a monetary loan, remitted the said money to a new bank account under the Defendant’s name while lending KRW 90 million to C on March 9, 2017, KRW 10 million, KRW 50 million on March 14, 2017, KRW 20 million on May 22, 2017, KRW 10 million on May 30, 2017, and KRW 90 million on May 30, 2017, may be recognized either as a dispute between the parties, or as a whole taking into account the entries in subparagraphs 1 and 2 and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The plaintiff asserted and determined that the plaintiff lent the above money to the defendant by remitting the amount of KRW 90 million to the bank account under the name of the defendant.

The defendant asserts that there was no fact that the defendant borrowed money from the plaintiff, and that the person who borrowed the above money was engaged in monetary transactions with the plaintiff using the defendant's passbook where C is the bad credit holder C, and therefore, he cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim.

The plaintiff and the defendant asserted that the plaintiff requested the loan of the above money to the plaintiff was C, and that the plaintiff did not confirm the plaintiff's intent of borrowing or repayment of the above money from the defendant before and after the above transfer. Since C and the defendant are simple mother and child, and that the plaintiff paid the above money to C by means of remitting it to the bank account in the name of the defendant while paying KRW 90 million to C, the monetary consumption loan contract was concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant for the above money.

It is difficult to see that the Plaintiff and the Defendant have directly concluded a monetary consumption lending contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, but there is no evidence to prove the fact that the Defendant granted C the authority to represent the above contract.

B. The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that, inasmuch as the Defendant received a loan of KRW 90 million from the Plaintiff to its own bank account, the Defendant is also liable for the repayment of the above loan, but the Defendant may allow C to use his bank account between C and her mother and child.

arrow