logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.08 2016나4562
대여금
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and defendant B are dismissed.

2. The appeal cost arises between the Plaintiff and the Defendant B.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and Defendant B are between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff and Defendant B, and Defendant C is the representative director of Defendant D (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) as the children of Defendant B.

B. Upon Defendant B’s request, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 30 million to Defendant C’s account on January 17, 2014, and KRW 35 million on or around March 31, 2014 (hereinafter “the instant money”).

C. On June 12, 2014, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendants a content-certified mail stating that the instant money was a loan to the Defendants, and that the principal and interest thereof should be returned to June 24, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, entry of Gap's evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On January 2014, Defendant B, who asserted by the Plaintiff, agreed to jointly and severally pay the Plaintiff the instant money to the end of May 2014, when it is necessary for the expenses incurred in preparing for the resumption of the business and the rent of the race-type factory located in Seocho-si, and the Plaintiff wired the instant money to the account of the Defendant C. As such, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the instant money and the damages for delay. If the instant money is deemed to be an investment money, not a loan, as alleged below by the Defendants, if it is deemed that the Plaintiff’s investment was held in custody and embezzled by using the instant money for personal purposes, Defendant C is liable to pay the Plaintiff the instant money and damages for delay due to tort.

B. The Defendants’ assertion is part of the amount of KRW 60 million, which the Plaintiff agreed to invest in order to operate a man-made plant located in Defendant B and Seoul as a partnership business. Since the Plaintiff invested only the amount of this case and subsequently closed a man-made plant located in Seoul on the wind that does not invest the remaining amount, the payment of the instant amount is made.

arrow