logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.17 2014가합39454
대여금
Text

1. As to KRW 110,00,000 among the Plaintiff and KRW 100,000 among them, the Defendant shall from January 16, 2007 to November 22, 2014.

Reasons

Basic Facts

A. From September 11, 2006 to December 18, 2006, the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant a total of KRW 94 million on seven occasions as indicated in the following table:

On December 19, 2006, the Defendant drafted a loan certificate (Evidence A 1) to the Plaintiff that “The Defendant borrowed KRW 94 million from the Plaintiff as indicated below, and paid KRW 6,000,000,000, plus KRW 6,000,000,000, out of the aforementioned amount and the interest derived therefrom, by January 15, 2007.” (Evidence A 1)

(hereinafter “First Payment”). The amount on September 26, 2006 (won) 6,000,000 on September 21, 2006; 6,000,000 on September 21, 2006; 30,000,000 on October 30, 306; 15,000,000 on December 4, 2006; 1,000,000 on December 5, 2006; 6,000,000 on December 11, 2006; and

B. On January 18, 2007, the Plaintiff paid the above amount to the Defendant by means of remitting KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant’s deposit account in the Defendant’s name C.

(2) On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the payment of this case was made formally by means of a false conspiracy, while subparagraph (1) of this case is a donation to the defendant who had economic difficulties at the time of the plaintiff's internal relationship with him, and that subparagraph (2) of this case was made formally by means of a false conspiracy, if there is no dispute about the basis for recognition / [the grounds for recognition], each entry of evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 5, and 6 (including numbers in case of serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the party's personal examination of the plaintiff, and judgment on the ground of claim for judgment of the whole purport of the pleadings 1). If the objective meaning of the text is clear, barring any special circumstance, the existence of declaration of intention and its contents should be recognized as well as the objective meaning of the text, in particular, by interpreting the text differently from the objective meaning of the text.

arrow