logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.09.29 2015나19726
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. Basic facts

(a) The parties to the case are between the parties and C;

The plaintiff is the wife C, and the defendant's wife is D.

(hereinafter referred to as “the married couple of the Plaintiff and C”, and the Defendant and D, respectively.

Plaintiff

On October 29, 2012, the remittance, etc. of couples and couples: KRW 7,800,000 from the passbook in the name of C to the passbook in the name of D; KRW 3,500,000 from the passbook in the name of C on December 20, 2012 to the passbook in the name of the defendant; KRW 19,20,000 from the passbook in the name of the plaintiff on December 21, 2012 to the passbook in the name of D; and KRW 30,50,000 was remitted in total from the passbook in the name of the plaintiff on December 21, 2012; and KRW 30,50,000 was remitted in total to the plaintiff on December 21, 2012.

The plaintiff and the obligor

1. The defendant or the obligor;

2. B prepared and delivered a certificate of borrowing (No. 1, hereinafter referred to as “certificate of borrowing of this case”) stating “B”.

3) The Defendant indicated on April 1, 2013 in the loan certificate of this case (Yan Dong-dong, E apartment No. 102 Dong 101)

(B) sell A to a third party and complete the registration of ownership transfer on the same day. [Grounds for recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number, if any, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply)

No. 10 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 30,500,000 borrowed money and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act until November 30, 2015, which is the sentencing date of the first instance court, where it is deemed reasonable for the Defendant to dispute as to the existence or scope of the obligation to perform, from April 2, 2013, following the day when the obligation to perform is due, pursuant to the contents of the loan certificate of this case, which is a disposal document of this case.

The plaintiff is the plaintiff.

arrow