logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.10.26 2015가단71036
대여금
Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 45,00,000 won and the period from August 28, 2015 to November 25, 2015.

Reasons

Basic Facts

Defendant C is a child of Defendant B.

On March 23, 2015, Defendant B entered “AE” at the bottom of the cash custody certificate as “AE at the time of receiving KRW 50 million and at the creditor’s request.” On the same day, Defendant B entered “the method of payment” attached to the said cash custody certificate as “the 7th day of each month, the 27th day of each month, and the 10,000 won per each month (the 2nd day appears to be the misunderstanding of the two times). In the event of arrears above the understanding (the 2nd case appears to be the misunderstanding of the obligation), Defendant B entered “I will accept the total amount of payment as required by AC,” and “I will receive KRW 50,000 won in cash and receive KRW 3,000 in cash several times per head of Tong.”

[Grounds for recognition] Fact-finding, Gap evidence 1-1, and all of the arguments' claims against defendant B, based on the above facts as to the judgment as to the ground for claim as to the plaintiff Eul's claim, the defendant Eul borrowed 50 million won from the plaintiff. According to the "Method of Payment" column attached to the above cash custody certificate, the final due date can be recognized as August 27, 2015. Thus, barring special circumstances, the defendant Eul is liable to pay the plaintiff 45 million won remaining after deducting five million won from the plaintiff's person who received the payment from the defendant Eul from the above 50 million won, and damages for delay calculated from August 28, 2015 to November 25, 2015 from the date following the last due date under the above loan agreement, the plaintiff's claim for the payment order of this case from August 28, 2015 to the date after the last due date of payment under the above agreement.

As to the claim against the defendant C, the fact that the stamp image in the name of the defendant C is the same as that of the defendant C.

arrow