logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.05.17 2016가단25375
대여금
Text

1. Defendant B’s KRW 14,400,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from May 17, 2016 to May 17, 2017.

Reasons

1. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B

A. According to the overall purport of the arguments and arguments, there is no dispute as to the Plaintiff’s assertion of the cause of the claim (1), Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 6, Gap evidence 8, Gap evidence 9, Eul evidence 10, and the whole purport of the arguments, the following facts are as follows: ① Defendant B established and operated Eul on July 1, 2009 as the representative director, and the Plaintiff was appointed as the representative director, and resigned on September 3, 2010; ② purchased vehicles to be used for business purposes in D, and entered into a loan agreement with Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. in the name of the Plaintiff as the representative director. The Plaintiff paid the above loan to the Plaintiff by April 30, 201; ③ Defendant B agreed to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 5,00,000 to the Plaintiff by the withdrawal of the complaint due to the Plaintiff’s fraud, etc.

Thus, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the above agreed amount of KRW 21,000,000 ( KRW 16,000,000) and damages for delay.

(2) The Plaintiff asserts that Defendant B is liable to pay KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff.

According to the statement of Gap evidence 1-3, it is recognized that defendant Eul prepared a letter of commitment to the effect that defendant Eul would pay 30,000,000 won to the plaintiff.

However, as to the occurrence of the above claim, the plaintiff asserts that the defendant B first received a guarantee from the Korea Credit Guarantee Fund under the name of the plaintiff and agreed to repay the above money to the plaintiff. The plaintiff did not dispute. According to the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiff applied for bankruptcy and exemption, and it appears that the plaintiff was exempted from the above loan obligation, and the plaintiff also argued that the defendant B agreed to pay the money with the loan of KRW 30,000,000 from the plaintiff as a business fund, such as the proceeds of revenue, etc.

arrow