logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.03.20 2019가단5145307
구상금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 15, 2015, the Plaintiff and C Bank (hereinafter “C Bank”) concluded an insurance contract for the right to borrow a monthly loan (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with the amount of insurance coverage as KRW 132,00,000 on January 12, 2015, on the grounds of forgery, fraud, unjust pressure, coercion, defective expression of intent, capacity for action, etc., to guarantee losses arising from invalidation or cancellation of the right of lease. The Plaintiff concluded the insurance contract for the right to borrow a monthly loan (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with the amount of insurance coverage as KRW 132,00,000.

B. D, E, E, F (the co-defendants of this case, but the decision of recommending reconciliation was finalized; hereinafter collectively referred to as “D, etc.”) conspireds to obtain a loan from a financial institution on the ground of false lessee. On December 30, 2014, the Defendant: (a) concluded a false lease agreement with the lessor, lessee D, and lessee from January 12, 2015 to January 11, 2017; (b) drafted a false loan agreement with the Plaintiff’s employees of the new bank in the name of 0,000,000 won (hereinafter referred to as “instant apartment agreement”); and (c) drafted a false lease agreement with the Plaintiff’s employees of the new bank under the name of 10,000,000,000 won (hereinafter referred to as “the instant lease agreement”); and (d) completed the lease agreement with the Plaintiff’s employees of the new bank under the name of 10,000,000,0000 won (hereinafter “the instant apartment loan agreement”).

C. D began to delay interest on a security deposit loan obligation against C Bank; and C Bank applied for subrogation against L Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “L”); however, on April 27, 2017, C Bank was entitled to reply to exemption from liability on the ground of “false lease and fraudulent loan.”

arrow