logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2017.08.18 2017나40952
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. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Upon the Plaintiff’s request from the Defendant for the lending of business funds, the Plaintiff lent KRW 1,98 million to the Defendant on June 2, 2015, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the above loans and the damages for delay. (2) The Defendant borrowed KRW 20 million at the interest rate of KRW 1% upon the Defendant’s request from the branch of June 2015.

On the other hand, C lends money to D at the above request of the defendant, and the loan is merely a direct payment from the account in the name of the plaintiff in a de facto marital relationship with D to the account of the defendant.

As above, the Defendant repaid the money borrowed from C on December 31, 2015.

B. Determination 1) In a case where a transfer was made to another person’s deposit account, the remittance may be made based on various causes, such as loan for consumption, donation, repayment, and simple delivery. Thus, even if there is no dispute between the parties, the Plaintiff asserts that the receipt of the money is a loan for consumption. On the other hand, when the Defendant asserts that it was received through a loan for consumption, the Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that it was received through a loan for consumption (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da30861, Jul. 26, 2012).

Furthermore, in full view of the following circumstances, it is insufficient to determine that the said money was paid as a loan, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that it was paid as a loan, in full view of the following circumstances that can be seen by comprehensively taking into account the respective descriptions of Nos. 1, 2, and 3 as to whether the said money was lent to the Defendant by the Plaintiff.

① Although the Plaintiff claimed to lend money to the Defendant is relatively large, it is proven that the Plaintiff and the Defendant have lent the loan, etc.

arrow