(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.06.16 2016나2130 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.06.16 2016나2130

대여금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 5,000,000 and to the plaintiff from March 15, 2015 to August 24, 2015.

Reasons

1. As to the cause of claim

A. 1) On January 18, 2006, the Plaintiff lent 2 million won interest rate of 2% (payment on April 14) to the Defendant on April 18, 2006, and on April 18, 2006. 2) On April 26, 2006, the Plaintiff decided on April 26, 2006 to the Defendant as 2% of interest rate (payment on April 14), and the due date of payment (payment on August 26, 2006).

(3) The Defendant paid the Plaintiff interest on the principal of the instant loan, which occurred until March 14, 2015. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in Gap evidence 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings.] The Defendant paid the Plaintiff interest on the principal of the instant loan.

B. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 5 million won and the amount of delay damages at the rate of 24% per annum from March 15, 2015 to August 24, 2015, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 15% per annum as the Plaintiff seeks within the agreed rate from the next day to the day of complete payment.

2. As to the defendant's argument

A. Party’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff borrowed the loan principal of this case as security deposit while leasing the building from the Defendant. On June 18, 2009, the Plaintiff and the Defendant settled a total of KRW 7,80,000,00,000 including the loan principal, interest, and smuggling monthly income, up to March 17, 2015. In other words, until March 17, 2015, the Plaintiff settled a total of KRW 9,00,000,000 (the first settlement amount of KRW 7,80,000,000,000 won - boiler repair cost of KRW 3,50,000,000,000,000 after the payment to the Plaintiff, and the remaining debt cannot be included in the Plaintiff’s loan principal of KRW 2,35,00,00 (the remaining principal of KRW 7,50,00,000,00,00). Nevertheless, the Plaintiff’s claim for the loan principal of this case was not included.

B. On August 12, 2005, the Plaintiff was acting for the Defendant C.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.16 2016가합550313

-수원지방법원안양지원 2015.07.23 2014가단101703

-의정부지방법원 2018.07.25 2018가단5270

-수원지방법원 2020.06.18 2019가합1827

-서울남부지방법원 2017.04.27 2016나62502