logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.09.05 2016가단21398
대여금등
Text

1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 163.8 million and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from August 19, 2016 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B

(a) Indication of claims: As stated in the corresponding part against the above defendant among the grounds for claims in the attached Form;

(b) Judgment by service (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant C

A. The plaintiff asserts as follows as the grounds for each of the instant claims against Defendant C.

(1) From September 26, 2012 to December 2, 2014, Defendant C borrowed a total of KRW 162 million from the Plaintiff jointly with Defendant B during several times, and (2) in the course of jointly operating a wholesaler with Defendant B, Defendant C received advance payment of KRW 2.6 million from the Plaintiff on February 2, 2015 and received KRW 8 million from the Plaintiff on February 2, 2015, and the Plaintiff suffered property damage equivalent to KRW 1.8 million due to the Defendants’ nonperformance of such obligation.

(2) Pursuant to Article 57(1) of the Commercial Act, Defendant C is jointly and severally liable to pay the amount arising from the preceding paragraph to the Plaintiff with Defendant B.

(3) Even if not, pursuant to Article 24 of the Commercial Act, Defendant C is jointly and severally liable with Defendant B to pay the amount coming from the preceding paragraph to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 24 of the Commercial Act.

B. This Court does not accept all the Plaintiff’s respective arguments for the following reasons.

(1) First, there is not sufficient evidence to acknowledge that Defendant B borrowed money from the Plaintiff at the time of borrowing money from the Plaintiff, Defendant C was the joint borrower, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this.

(2) Next, insofar as Defendant C’s joint liability is not recognized for the foregoing reasons, there is no room to acknowledge Defendant C’s joint liability pursuant to Article 57(1) of the Commercial Act, which applies only to “when several persons assume obligations”.

(3) Finally, part of Gap 1 and Eul 1.

arrow