logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.25 2015가단76835
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s interest payment period of 1205-10-22 annual 5% 2005-11-21,000, 00 205-10-25 2005-10-24 2000-23 2006-32006-2222006-32005-22000, 4007-11-22222222007-222007-212120,000, 2007-208-120, 2008-10, 208-10, 208-10, 208-10, 208-10, 200, 208-10, 200-25, 200, 2008-120-7.

2. According to the statement 1-4 of the certificate No. 1-1-4, the plaintiff transferred each of the money listed in paragraphs 1-6 of the above table from three accounts of his national bank (each account number: C, D, and E) to the defendant's bank account, to the non-party F's account, and the plaintiff transferred the money listed in paragraph 7 to the defendant's name. The plaintiff can recognize the fact that the defendant's name is stated in the name of the client while transferring the money listed in paragraph 7.

However, with respect to whether the Plaintiff paid each of the above amounts to the Defendant as a loan, the health team, ① the Plaintiff served as the manager of Gtel in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which was owned by the Defendant from January 10, 2004 to March 20, 2014; ② the Plaintiff managed the above officetels and used his bank account as a deposit account for business purposes; ② the Plaintiff used his bank account as a deposit account; ③ the name of the Defendant’s account in the name of “H” rather than the Plaintiff’s name; ③ the KRW 5 million as indicated in paragraph (5) as indicated in paragraph (5) as “H” was deposited in the name of “I”; ④ the Plaintiff and the Defendant were a long-term relationship with the Defendant; ⑤ the Defendant deposited KRW 20 million with the Plaintiff’s national bank account (E and the Plaintiff asserted that there was no dispute between the parties, or the evidence 2-1, 2-2, 3-2, and 3-2).

arrow