(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.12.30 2014가단2673

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) 서울남부지방법원 2014.12.30 2014가단2673

대여금 등

Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 30,000,000 and Defendant B Religious Organization C church on February 12, 2014.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s recommendation made on April 16, 201 by Defendant D to invest the diversity in a gift certificates company, whether it is a multi-level company, (hereinafter “NL”) (hereinafter “NL”) with Defendant D’s aggregate of two million won on April 16, 2013, and the same year.

7. 19.7 million won, and the same year;

9. 23. 23. 3 million won was remitted in total, and Defendant D remitted 2.7 million won out of the above money to or with the transfer of the said money.

B. Until September 16, 2013, the Plaintiff received a transfer of profit from investment funds, such as E.A. E. E. E. E. E. E. E.R., but failed to receive the profit thereafter.

On the other hand, Defendant D is a pastor of Defendant B Religious Organization C church (hereinafter “Defendant church”).

C. Accordingly, on October 13, 2013, the Plaintiff sought reimbursement for the said investment amount of KRW 3 million.

Defendant D, on the same day, prepared a loan certificate (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) with the following purport that Defendant D paid KRW 2.5 million to the Plaintiff as investment income and paid KRW 3 million to the Plaintiff the total amount of investment income to be paid in the future and the investment income to be paid in the future.

Now. Now. 300: O,000,000 on the basis of the money deposited online. The sum of the amount deposited online. C church D D (based on recognition) is without dispute, Gap's 1 through 3, Eul's 1, Eul's 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion is a selective claim, and the contract amount of three million won under the premise that the plaintiff lent the above three million won to the defendant D, and the plaintiff did not lend the above three million won to the defendant D, and even if the plaintiff made an investment in the AD, the plaintiff's claim is not a loan to the defendant D, but a contract amount of three million won under the premise that the defendant assumes an overlapping obligation with regard to the repayment obligation against the above three million won.

(b) insofar as the determination of the cause of the claim is recognized to be genuine, the court may deny the content of the statement.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2015.08.20 2015나50854

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.03.30 2015가단84497

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2016.06.22 2015가단34119

-광주지방법원 2017.04.27 2016가합54003

-서울북부지방법원 2017.12.12 2017가단15918