(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.12.18 2020나53463

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) 인천지방법원 2020.12.18 2020나53463

대여금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and in light of the evidence submitted by the court of first instance, the fact-finding and the judgment of the court of first instance

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows, except for adding the following "2. Additional Judgment" to the argument that the plaintiff lent KRW 50,000,000 to the defendant in the court of first instance, the witness E in the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be dismissed as " witness E in the court of first instance", and as such, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. On May 8, 2017, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion lent KRW 50,000 to the Defendant.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 50,000,000 and damages for delay.

B. Determination 1) Even if there is no dispute as to the fact that money was given and received between the parties, if there is a dispute as to the fact that the reason for granting the money was leased, the fact of lending shall be proven by the Plaintiff (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972; 2014Da26187, Jul. 10, 2014). 2) In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the fact that the Plaintiff paid KRW 50,00,000 to the Defendant on May 8, 2017 is not a dispute between the parties.

However, in light of the following facts and circumstances, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the cause of delivery of KRW 50,000,000 was leased, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

① When paying KRW 50,00,000 to the Defendant, the Plaintiff did not separately set the due date or interest, and did not prepare objective data proving the lending of the loan, such as a monetary loan contract or a loan certificate.

② The Plaintiff shall pay the said money directly to the Defendant.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

참조판례

-대법원 1972. 12. 12. 선고 72다221 판결

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2020.11.06 2020나51948

-의정부지방법원 2018.01.24 2017나7546

-수원지방법원 2018.03.29 2017나7573

-전주지방법원 2018.01.19 2016가합1754

-창원지방법원 통영지원 2018.02.08 2017가단23720