(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.08.26 2020가단4116

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) 대구지방법원 2020.08.26 2020가단4116

투자금

Text

The defendant shall pay 60,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 12% per annum from February 11, 2020 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. From April 2010, the Defendant, who was appointed as the head of the counseling office of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”), was the Plaintiff from the date of Nonparty Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”), the name of “E Business,” which was the project for the investment and development of the Han-gu Large Complex Building, Daegu-gu

(2) Upon the Defendant’s recommendation, the Plaintiff invested KRW 1,00,000 in the instant project on March 8, 2012, and KRW 30,000,000 for each of the following month. (c) On March 30, 2012, the Defendant prepared a loan certificate stating that “only the daily gold amount contracted on March 30, 2012, will be responsible for the joint enforcement of E” with respect to the said investment amount, and issued to the Plaintiff. [Grounds for recognition] The Plaintiff did not dispute, and the purport of the entire pleadings, including the entry of the serial number, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, the defendant shall be deemed to have agreed to return the investment amount to the plaintiff if the plaintiff is unable to return it. There is no dispute between the parties that the plaintiff did not recover the investment principal.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 60,000,000 won and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 12% per annum from February 11, 2020 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the service of the original copy of the payment order sought by the plaintiff.

B. As to the judgment of the defendant's assertion, the defendant shall seek the return of the investment amount against the non-party company, and the defendant shall only assume the plaintiff's intentional liability, and thus, he cannot comply with the plaintiff's claim.

However, the defendant's assertion is rejected, since the fact that the defendant agreed to return the investment amount to the plaintiff is as seen earlier.

3. Conclusion.

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.01.08 2014가합1898

-수원지방법원안산지원 2015.11.19 2014가합3839

-수원지방법원성남지원 2019.06.13 2018가합408295

-대구지방법원 2018.02.02 2017가단16256

-대구지방법원 2018.05.10 2017가단28570