logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2017.09.22 2016가단48086
대여금 반환
Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. D (Korean name E, hereinafter the Plaintiff’s husband) carried the oxygen water tank manufactured by Defendant C into China and decided to jointly sell it with the Defendants.

B. Upon the request of E, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 22,730,000 to the Defendant C’s account, which was the amount converted into the Chinese Government’s 200,000 bills into the Chinese Government in August 2007.

C. On August 10, 2007, the Defendants promised to borrow the Chinese bill 200,000 (200,000,000 Chinese money as the purchase price for the small and medium-sized goods purchased after the incorporation of a domestic trade business corporation to China. If the Defendants fail to perform the said promise, they prepared and provided to the Plaintiff a loan certificate stating that they will directly repay the above amount to the Plaintiff (hereinafter the loan certificate of this case).

E died on November 1, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence 1, Gap's evidence 3, Gap's evidence 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendants did not perform all the obligations stipulated in the instant loan certificate. Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount stated in the claim on the basis of exchange rate dated December 7, 2016, which was the time when the instant lawsuit was filed.

B. Since the above funds invested by the Defendants’ assertion E are insufficient to establish a Korean legal entity and manufacture the oxygen water purifier, E and the Defendants agreed to manufacture the oxygen water purifier using the existing legal entity, manufacturing the oxygen water purifier using the above funds and bringing it into China, but the joint business was failed due to the legal problems and cultural differences thereafter, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is without merit.

C. The establishment of a trade business entity stated in the loan certificate of this case is limited to the means for the small and medium-sized sales business and is the basic purpose of the above arrangement.

arrow