logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2015.04.07 2014나7605
대여금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as stated in the part of the first instance court's judgment, except for each height, such as "the part ", as shown in the part ", i.e., the part ", i., i.e., the 3rd to 4th 1th m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m

F. On the other hand, on July 30, 2010, E issued and delivered to the network A a written statement of non-payment of cash that the amount of KRW 60 million out of KRW 110 million is to be repaid until July 30, 2011.

In addition, the defendant, E, and D shall return KRW 60 million out of KRW 100 million invested by A and D until August 7, 2010 by E. However, if the promise was established, the defendant, E, and D shall prepare an agreement on investment amount (No. 14) that permits the registration right of the fashion design to be used by D.

G. Thereafter, on October 28, 2014, B and D filed a lawsuit for a loan claim against E based on the aforementioned written statement of rejection of cash payment, etc., with the Ulsan District Court 2014Kadan28632, the instant case was proceeding by service by public notice and ordered E to pay KRW 30 million each to B and D on February 6, 2015.

【In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 3, 6, 9, 11 through 14, part 2 (1) of the witness E of the trial, the testimony of the trial witness E of this court, the substantial fact of this court, the whole purport of the pleadings, and the whole purport of the pleadings, which was written by the defendant as to the preparation of a statement of cash payment as of July 30, 2010 under the name of the defendant (hereinafter “this case’s statement of payment of cash”), was made by notifying the defendant that he would harm the defendant’s life by mobilization of violence, which did not make profits even though he invested KRW 110 million.

arrow