(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.04.06 2015나26346

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) 서울고등법원 2016.04.06 2015나26346

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is ordered.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The deceased A’s sale of housing owned by the network and deposit withdrawal process 1) the network A (hereinafter “the network”).

(2) On June 22, 2010, the deceased delegated the sale of the building site and ground of Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu and the deceased’s possession to the Defendant, and concluded a sales contract with the Defendant on June 22, 2010 with respect to the said real estate by setting the purchase price of KRW 1.677,90 million and received the said purchase price in full from D. (2) The deceased deposited KRW 851,974,000 that remains after the deceased’s birth, including the Defendant, donated a part of the said purchase price, at the branch of the Bank of Korea; however, the Defendant intended to carry out a golf course business with the deceased as business funds, and the Defendant deposited the money in the account of the Defendant by withdrawing the entire deposit in the name of the Defendant at the home branch of the Bank.

3) On and after the withdrawal of the above deposit, the Defendant stated as follows: “I, on a regular basis, borrow the above amount (on a daily basis as to the Defendant’s failure to pay the above amount): 1%; the period: 10%; and the Defendant, who is the deceased and the Defendant who is the obligation of the deceased, who is the obligation,” the cash loan certificate (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”).

(B) The deceased and made the deceased sign and affix his seal on the deceased’s name. (B) The deceased demanded the Defendant to return the above withdrawal amount to the Defendant, but the Defendant refused to do so, and the Defendant filed a complaint for embezzlement and fraud. On September 26, 2012, the prosecutor issued a non-prosecution disposition for non-prosecution on the ground that the deceased and the Defendant were relatives living together with the deceased, and the period of filing a complaint for a crime subject to victim’s complaint has expired.

2. The Deceased is in the process of the above investigation by the Defendant.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.08.19 2014가합178

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2014.08.22 2013고단2153

-전주지방법원정읍지원 2017.04.18 2016가단10375

-전주지방법원 2018.07.06 2017나4747

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.01.11 2015가단114595