(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.10.16 2017가단25708

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) 광주지방법원 2018.10.16 2017가단25708

상속채무금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Summary of the cause of the plaintiff's claim

A. From April 12, 2004 to July 23, 2007, the Plaintiff agreed to lend money to G by setting the time limit for payment to “the time when the G receives compensation for losses incurred from the installation and cultivation of the relevant facilities and farming” between the net G from April 12, 2004 to July 23, 2007. The Plaintiff loaned the money to G and its family members by remitting a sum of KRW 117,090,000 to the bank account in the name of the Defendants, over a total of 100 times. On September 24, 2004, the loan remains in KRW 89,090,000 as of the remainder of the loan.

B. G is not obligated to repay the above loan up to the present day after receiving compensation from the Maman-gun on October 2007, after having died on January 14, 2008. The heir of G is obligated to return the loan, such as the statement in the purport of the claim, according to his/her inheritance shares, and pay damages for delay.

(hereinafter “W”) 2. Determination on the Defendants’ defense of extinctive prescription

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s defense of extinctive prescription is as follows: (a) the period of extinctive prescription of the Plaintiff’s credit against the Deceased is calculated from July 23, 2007, which is the last lending date; and (b) thereafter, (c) the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming the return of the instant loan on October 11, 2017, ten years after the statute of limitations expired; (d)

B. The plaintiff argued that the time period for repayment of the loan claim against the deceased was determined at the time of receiving the compensation from the deceased's saves growing facilities, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s loan claim against the Deceased is not fixed due date, and the extinctive prescription is calculated from July 23, 2007 when the above loan claim occurred, and it is clear in the record that the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming the return of the loan in this case on October 11, 2017, and therefore, the Defendants’ defenses for the completion of the extinctive prescription are reasonable.

3. Conclusion

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 통영지원 고성군법원 2018.01.18 2017가단39

-울산지방법원 2016.10.12 2016나2260

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.02.14 2016가단144827

-춘천지방법원원주지원 2016.10.12 2016가단3644

-전주지방법원 2016.06.28 2016가단1887