logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.08.11 2015가단70085
대여금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 63.1 million to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s 5% per annum from January 20, 2015 to August 11, 2015.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the following facts: (a) there is no dispute between the parties; (b) evidence Nos. 1 to 3; (c) evidence No. 7; and (d) witness C’s testimony; and (c) the purport of the entire pleadings.

The Plaintiff remitted total of KRW 100 million to the Defendant Company’s account, including KRW 50 million on April 8, 2009 and KRW 50 million on April 14, 2009.

B. The details that the Plaintiff received from the Defendant Company are as follows.

The repayment date (limited to the full amount) Nos. 27, 100 on July 27, 109; 2,000 on June 1, 200 on September 1, 200 on September 80, 209; 30 on October 30, 80 on October 30, 111, 304 on December 30, 304 on December 80, 24, 2004 on December 80, 180 on July 18, 16, 200 on the aggregate of 80,000 on September 30, 206, 200 on May 16, 205;

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff claimed that the Defendant Company received a refund of KRW 20 million out of the principal on July 27, 2009 and received a refund of KRW 80,000,000 from July 27, 2009 to the remainder of KRW 80,000 per month after converting the said amount into the loan, and received interest for 22 months from the end of August 2009 to the end of June 201, but did not receive the remainder of KRW 80,000,000 from the end of July 1, 2011. The Plaintiff claimed that the Plaintiff paid the interest for 22 months from the end of August 2009 to the end of June 201.

The defendant company asserts that the defendant company, the former representative director of the defendant company, was individually invested by the plaintiff in order to raise funds for the operation of the defendant company, and the investment agreement is resolved after the plaintiff was settled, and thus, it cannot be viewed as the defendant company's obligation to return it individually, and even if the above debt is the defendant company's obligation, the above repayment amount of KRW 36.9 million should be appropriated for the repayment of the principal amount.

B. The obligation to return the investment amount.

arrow