logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.08.21 2018나2054966
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The ground for appeal by the plaintiff citing the judgment of the court of first instance is not significantly different from the argument of the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and decision of the court of first instance are justified, considering the evidence submitted in the court of first instance as well as each evidence submitted in this court.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition as follows. Therefore, the relevant part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiffs asserted that the Plaintiff Company lent KRW 191,113,797 as interest on the loan to the Defendant from November 13, 2013 to January 15, 2014, on the grounds that the Defendant requested a loan equivalent to the interest on the successful bid price, after having been awarded a successful bid in the name of the Defendant’s individual name.

In addition to the whole purport of the arguments in Gap evidence No. 2, 8 and Eul evidence No. 9 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the facts that the plaintiff company remitted 162,812,718 won to the defendant or defendant's husband D account several times from November 13, 2013 to April 7, 2014, as shown in the "Payment Statement" attached to the judgment of the court of first instance, it is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff company lent the above money to the defendant. However, the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs alone is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff company lent the above money to the defendant. In addition to the whole purport of the arguments in the evidence No. 1, No. 13 to No. 27, the plaintiff company and the defendant acquired real estate on Oct. 25, 2013 and acquired it by selling it after selling it after selling it, the plaintiff company or the defendant company will obtain auction proceeds from the plaintiff company's individual or the defendant company for the purpose of auction.

arrow