(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.10.25 2019가단525111

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) 수원지방법원 2019.10.25 2019가단525111

대여금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay 34,300,000 won to the plaintiff and 20% per annum from January 1, 2018 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The following facts are recognized as either of the facts in dispute between the parties, or as a whole by taking account of the respective descriptions of evidence A Nos. 1 and 2 and the purport of the entire pleadings:

1) From April 28, 2014 to May 7, 2015, the Plaintiff loaned approximately KRW 35 million to the Defendant via approximately 15 times. 2) around 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a quasi-loan agreement with the Defendant to provide the Plaintiff with a repayment of KRW 35 million up to December 31, 2017, on the condition that the Defendant would pay the Plaintiff the loan up to the time, and that if the said loan is not repaid until the said repayment date, 20% damages for delay shall be added annually.

3) Meanwhile, the Plaintiff paid KRW 20 million from the Defendant on April 30, 2015 and KRW 500,000,000 from May 1, 2015, respectively, but did not pay the remainder of the loan and the damages for delay. Accordingly, the Plaintiff notified several times to repay the above loan and the damages for delay thereof, but the Defendant did not pay the remainder of KRW 34,30,000,000 (= KRW 35,000,000 and KRW 77,000,000,000,000 from January 1, 2018, 2018 following the due date of the loan agreement, and the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the loan and the damages for delay until the due date of the conclusion of the agreement.

2. As to the defendant's argument

A. The defendant's assertion 1) The defendant's assertion that it is difficult for a third party to repay the above loan obligation due to the fraud (hereinafter "the defendant's assertion 1").

(2) Since individual rehabilitation procedures commenced against the Defendant, the repayment of the above loan obligations cannot be performed.

(hereinafter “Defendant’s assertion”). B.

Judgment

1. As to the Defendant’s argument, ① the circumstance alone, like the Defendant’s assertion, leads to the Plaintiff’s occurrence of the above loan claim against the Defendant or the suspension of its exercise.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2016.11.23 2016가단1812

-서울북부지방법원 2019.06.18 2017가단26895

-창원지방법원 마산지원 2021.01.20 2019가단5324

-서울동부지방법원 2016.12.07 2016가합107644