logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.04.18 2018나69196
대여금
Text

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendants are jointly and severally liable to the plaintiff for 60 million won.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 10, 2016, Defendant C is the owner of the health room referred to as “D” (hereinafter “instant health room”) on the f building in the branch of Sungnam-si and the 1st underground floor, and Defendant C is the husband of the Defendant C, who works as the trap in the instant health room, and operates the instant health room.

B. Upon Defendant B’s request, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 5 million to Defendant B’s account on February 22, 2016, and KRW 55 million to Defendant C’s account on April 1, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, and 4 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff Defendants jointly operated the instant healthcare. At Defendant B’s request, the Plaintiff loaned 60 million won (hereinafter “the instant money”) to the Defendants by setting the due date for payment as one year.

The loan of the instant money was made for the lease of a place of business, which is an act of preparation for opening a business, and is a commercial activity under Article 47 of the Commercial Act. Under Article 57 of the Commercial Act, several persons are jointly and severally liable to repay the instant money, and the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to repay the said money.

B. Defendant B entered into an investment contract with the Plaintiff on the operation of the head of the instant health center, and received the instant money from the Plaintiff as investment funds, and decided to distribute profits when the amount was left over the quarter of profit and loss of the head of the instant health center, not to return the instant money, regardless of profit and loss.

As long as Defendant B does not have any profit, it is not obligated to return the instant money, and Defendant C merely lends the name without being involved in the operation of the instant healthcare.

3. Defendant B.

arrow