logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.03.29 2015가단67948
대여금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 20,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from February 5, 2016 to March 29, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff transferred KRW 13,000,000 to C’s account on August 7, 2006.

B. It appears that the amount written in the name of the Defendant and C is 20,000,000 won and the date of issuance of the loan certificate.

There is a loan certificate on August 7, 2006 and October 7, 2006.

【Reasons for Recognition: Each entry in Evidence A Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings】

2. Determination

A. On August 7, 2006, the Plaintiff: (a) transferred KRW 13,00,000 to the Defendant’s wife C’s account; and (b) lent KRW 20,000,000 to the Defendant by means of paying KRW 7,000,000 in cash; and (c) the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 40,000,000,000 plus KRW 20,000,000 to the Plaintiff.

However, the Defendant did not pay at all 40,000,000 won that the Plaintiff promised to pay to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit to receive KRW 40,000,000 from the Defendant and damages for delay.

B. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the court below held that the Plaintiff lent KRW 20,000,000 to the Defendant, however, the evidence alone submitted by the Plaintiff is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 40,000,000 to the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 20 million won with 5% interest per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from February 5, 2016 to March 29, 2016, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the plaintiff, and 15% interest per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the plaintiff's remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow