logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.01.12 2016가단29484
대여금등
Text

1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is the Yeongdeungpo-gu District Court’s registration office with respect to the size of 208 square meters prior to Youngcheon-si, Youngcheon-si.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant received 2.5 million won from the plaintiff on September 26, 2006.

No. (A) No. 1) of the Cash Storage Certificate with the content of “I,” and on October 26, 2006, I received the Cash Storage Certificate with the content of “I, as I borrowed KRW 10 million.”

B. On July 11, 2006, the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage on the land owned by the Defendant with the maximum debt amount of KRW 5 million and the mortgagee as the Plaintiff with respect to the land of KRW 208 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

(hereinafter “instant collateral security”). C.

On December 15, 2006, the Defendant endorsed and delivered to the Plaintiff a promissory note with the face value of KRW 30 million issued by a third party, and the due date of payment of which is three months later (hereinafter “instant promissory note”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the principal lawsuit

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant borrowed KRW 50 million from the Plaintiff on September 26, 2006, and KRW 16 million on October 26, 2006, and the Plaintiff did not sell the instant real estate even if he received KRW 16 million on the purchase price while selling the instant real estate to the Plaintiff. ③ The Plaintiff borrowed KRW 5 million at the cost of acquiring an office, and issued the instant promissorysory note as collateral, ④ the Plaintiff paid KRW 20 million on the purchase price for a charnel house business, but the instant promissory note was defaulted. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant paid KRW 53.5 million on September 26, 2006, and KRW 16 million on the purchase price to the Plaintiff. However, the Defendant did not borrow money from the Plaintiff on September 26, 2006, and KRW 30 million on the purchase price to the Plaintiff, as alleged in the Plaintiff’s assertion, and the Defendant did not receive money from the Plaintiff on September 16, 2006.

arrow