logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.11.12 2014나1086
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court of the first instance’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the part pertaining to “A. 17 million won loan,” which is written by the court of first instance, from 5th to 20th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 6th 5th 6th

2. Parts to be dried;

C. The Plaintiff asserts that the total amount of the loan to the Defendant was KRW 67 million, and the Plaintiff sought additional payment of KRW 17 million, excluding KRW 50 million, for which the Plaintiff filed a criminal complaint, and delay damages therefrom.

First, as to the above KRW 17 million among the above KRW 17 million, it is recognized that the Plaintiff remitted the amount of KRW 7 million on October 18, 2004 to the Defendant’s passbook.

However, according to the purport of Gap evidence No. 6 and the whole pleadings, at the time of the criminal complaint on August 6, 2008, the plaintiff filed a complaint that "the defendant received four copies of 10 million won check from the plaintiff as the fund for purchasing apartment buildings around May 6, 2004, and transferred 7 million won to the account under the defendant's name for self-reliance expenses on October 18, 2004, and 3 million won received three times each, and acquired 50 million won in total." According to the above facts of recognition, the above 7 million won was included in 50 million won which the plaintiff filed a criminal complaint.

2.(b)

As determined in the claim, it appears that the amount already paid or exempted by an agreement on August 7, 2008 between the plaintiff and the defendant was part of the amount, and there is no evidence to prove that the plaintiff lent 7 million won to the defendant separately.

The plaintiff's above 7 million won argument is without merit.

Next, as to the remainder of KRW 10 million, the health team, and the plaintiff, around May 6, 2004, held the defendant as a check at the same time on the same date and at the same time on May 6, 2004, the amount of KRW 40 million among them is above 2.

arrow