(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.05.12 2016나2043405

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) 서울고등법원 2017.05.12 2016나2043405

대여금

Text

1. All appeals by the plaintiffs and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the main claim

A. In light of the Plaintiffs’ assertion, around May 17, 2012, the Plaintiffs lent KRW 130,000,000 to the Defendant, who is his/her father and wife, and the Defendant is obligated to refund the loans of KRW 130,000,000 to the Plaintiffs and delay damages.

Preliminaryly, even if the above 130,000,000 won is not recognized, the plaintiffs are provided with the above money on the premise that the defendant supports the plaintiffs, and thus, it constitutes an onerous donation. Since the defendant does not support the plaintiffs at present, and the plaintiffs cancel the above donation contract, the defendants are liable to pay the plaintiff the above 130,000,000 won and delay damages.

B. In the case of the Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2014Gahap23786, the Defendant’s defense 1) the summary of the Defendant’s defense was agreed to be paid KRW 100,000 per month from the Defendant and brought a lawsuit against the Defendant, but the Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit of this case with the same content as the withdrawal of the lawsuit, and thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as there is no interest in the lawsuit. 2) Even if the claim of this case is identical to the claim of this case, even if the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant.

Even if the Plaintiff’s withdrawal of the previous lawsuit and re-instigation of the instant lawsuit, it is difficult to deem that it is unlawful, and there is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff agreed to withdraw the lawsuit between the Plaintiff and the Defendant in the previous lawsuit to have agreed to do so in the subsequent lawsuit, and there is no other evidence or ground to deem that the instant lawsuit has no interest in the lawsuit, and therefore, the Defendant’s prior defense on the merits is groundless.

C. Judgment on the merits 1) On the main argument, the plaintiffs leased D apartment to F and received the lease deposit amount of KRW 130,000,000 (hereinafter “the instant money”).

B B from April 17, 2012 to the same year

5. As between 17. The defendant

유사 판례

-서울행정법원 2017.10.13 2016구합6474

-울산지방법원 2018.07.26 2018가단2614

-서울남부지방법원 2020.12.01 2020가단236910

-제주지방법원 2019.10.14 2019가단51699

-창원지방법원 2019.07.04 2018구합171