logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.03.21 2016가단212080
대여금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 100,000,000 for the Plaintiff and 18% per annum from February 6, 2008 to November 30, 2015.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff deposited KRW 20,00,000 on November 17, 2004, KRW 30,000,000 on February 1, 2005, KRW 20,000 on March 30, 2005, KRW 5,500,000 on April 18, 2005, and KRW 1,570,000 on May 6, 2005, KRW 20,000 on May 28, 2005, and KRW 10,000 on June 1, 2005, and KRW 13,400 on June 13, 2005, respectively.

B. Each of the three lending and borrowing agreements in Chapter 3 (hereinafter “each of the lending and borrowing agreements in this case”) entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant as to the loan principal of KRW 30,000,000, KRW 40,000, KRW 30,000, KRW 300,000 per annum, and interest rate of KRW 24% per annum.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the defendant from February 1, 2005 to the same year.

6. By 13. 18,470,00 won interest of KRW 2,20,000 per month was set and lent, but the Defendant prepared three copies of a monetary lending contract of KRW 100,000,000 in total of the leased principal around April 2007, and the Defendant did not pay interest of KRW 1,50,000 each month even though the Defendant agreed to pay interest of KRW 1,50,000 each month, and the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff 1,00,000,000 and interest or delay damages thereon.

B. The defendant alleged that the plaintiff did not lend KRW 100,000 to the defendant, but the plaintiff and the defendant made an investment in the plaintiff while operating the PC for about three years from around May 6, 2006 to around 2008, and paid KRW 33,800,000 in total from around December 4, 2007 to around December 4, 2007. Each of the monetary lending contracts of this case claimed that the plaintiff made an investment in the PC with the plaintiff's wife at the plaintiff's request for the purpose of gathering this.

3. Determination

A. Each of the instant monetary lending contracts, which is a written document, is evidence of the Plaintiff’s above lending facts, as to the cause of the claim.

The defendant is a monetary lending contract of this case.

arrow