(영문) 창원지방법원진주지원 2017.05.16 2016가단35426

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) 창원지방법원진주지원 2017.05.16 2016가단35426

청구이의

Text

1. The defendant's order for payment is based on the defendant's order of Jincheon-si court of Jincheon-si to the defendant's Jinwon District Court of Jincheon-si to the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is the spouse of the non-party C, who is the defendant's friendship, and is the wife relationship with the father and the wife.

B. Around January 6, 2006, the Defendant and the Defendant husband received a cash custody certificate (hereinafter “the cash custody certificate of this case”) from C, stating that “I will keep KRW 100 million and return at any time,” and the said cash custody certificate is signed and sealed by C and the Plaintiff.

C. The Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff and C for a payment order claiming payment of KRW 100 million and its delay damages with the Jinwon District Court Decision 2013Ra699, Nov. 20, 2013. The said court held on September 6, 2013 that “The Plaintiff and C jointly and severally agreed with the Defendant at the rate of KRW 1,50,000 and its delay damages with the rate of KRW 1,50,000 per month from September 6, 2013 to November 26, 2013; and that “the payment order shall be paid at the rate of KRW 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment”

The above payment order was finalized on December 11, 2013. [The facts that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that there is no fact that the defendant prepared a cash custody certificate of this case to the defendant, and there is no fact that he lent money from the defendant or provided joint and several sureties's obligations, and that compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case should be rejected.

As to this, the defendant prepared a cash custody certificate of this case in consultation with C, and even if it is not so, C borrowed money several times from the defendant for the purpose of using it for living expenses, housework expenses, and study expenses of children, etc., which constitutes a juristic act concerning daily home affairs, and the plaintiff is jointly and severally liable to return the borrowed money to the plaintiff.

B. Whether an agreement for joint and several sureties is concluded.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원진주지원사천시법원 2016.04.26 2015가단30

-창원지방법원진주지원 2015.04.24 2014가단12757

-창원지방법원마산지원 2019.10.31 2019가단2486

-창원지방법원진주지원 2020.04.03 2019가단6719

-창원지방법원진주지원 2015.11.11 2015가단6902