(영문) 창원지방법원통영지원 2015.01.22 2014가단8324

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) 창원지방법원통영지원 2015.01.22 2014가단8324

대여금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The parties’ assertion asserts that the Defendant should pay the amount of KRW 22 million on the ground that the Plaintiff lent the sum of KRW 22 million to the Defendant’s deposit account from January 5, 2010 to July 20, 201.

In regard to this, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff gave 22 million won to the defendant's words C, but only remitted money to the defendant's deposit account for convenience, and the above money to C is merely a donation without compensation under each subparagraph, not a loan.

2. First of all, we examine whether the Plaintiff is the Defendant.

According to the statements in Gap evidence 1-1-3 and Gap evidence 2-2, the plaintiff's deposit account in the name of the defendant for January 5, 2010 and the same year

1. 6.5 million won, 2 million won on April 13, 2011, and the same year;

7. It is recognized that a total of KRW 22 million has been remitted to 20 million.10 million.

However, the following circumstances revealed by the overall purport of evidence No. 5-1 to No. 4 and No. 6 of the evidence No. 5-2 and the entire pleadings, namely, C appears to be operating a business registration under the name of the defendant who is the birthee, and at the same time C, could transfer money to the defendant's account in the name of the business owner who is the title holder of the business registration while sending money to C. In June 2014, the plaintiff found the defendant's office in relation to the above KRW 22 million. Since C, which became aware of this fact, was sent to the police at the time of receipt of 112 reports, it was indicated that the police was in a credit and obligation between the plaintiff and C in the report processing list, and it is difficult to readily conclude that the plaintiff transferred money to the defendant's account under the name of the defendant in light of the fact that the defendant acquired the above KRW 22 million by fraud, but it was difficult to conclude that the transfer of money was made under the name of the defendant.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2020.12.10 2020나54985

-부산지방법원 2016.09.29 2015가단71012

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.26 2015나63038

-서울서부지방법원 2015.10.14 2014가단37715

-수원지방법원안양지원 2016.04.27 2015가단113840