logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.05.16 2016가단111148
양수금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay 41,400,000 won to the plaintiff and 15% per annum from October 14, 2016 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 24, 2006, while the Defendant leased and used a container factory located in Kimpo-si from D, the Defendant prepared a cash storage certificate with the purport that the sum of the monthly rent in arrears to D is KRW 28,200,000,000, and on the same day, “the sum of the rent in arrears and the monthly rent accrued at the end of each month will be paid in 2,100,000 won.”

B. The defendant is the above A.

Around June 18, 2007, after preparing a cash storage certificate and a memorandum of payment as stated in the statement of payment, D did not make payment as stated in the statement of payment, and around June 18, 2007, D agreed to make payment of rent 20,000,000 won in arrears on and after April 24, 2006 to D up to December 31, 2007, including the rent for arrears arising after April 24, 2006, the said promissory note No. 1,40,000 won (hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed of this case”).

C. Around August 8, 2016, D entered into a contract on the transfer of claims to the Plaintiff on the instant notarial deed, and around August 10, 2016, D sent a notice stating the transfer of claims to the Defendant by content-certified mail.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff who acquired the claim on the Notarial Deed from D the principal amount of KRW 41.4 million under the agreement and delay damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from October 14, 2016 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the day when a copy of the complaint in this case was served on the Defendant.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The summary of the argument is that the defendant only made a written agreement to repay the unpaid monthly rent at the request of the lessor D, and it does not actually borrowed cash, and the claim for the monthly rent is a claim.

arrow