(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.05.03 2015가합57955

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) 인천지방법원 2016.05.03 2015가합57955

대여금

Text

1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 215,866,872 and the interest rate thereon from September 10, 2015 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The plaintiff 1) lent 500,000,000 won to the defendants at 20% per annum. The defendants paid part of the above loans to D and E designated by the plaintiff, and since E received part of the loans from the money deposited by the defendants and repaid the amount equivalent to the above amount, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the plaintiff the remaining loans 215,94,722 won and delayed payment damages. 2) The defendants paid 500,000,000 won to the corporate bank account of the defendant Eul corporation to the plaintiff. 2) The plaintiff is not the plaintiff, but the creditor under the Notarial Deed and the seizure and collection order under the Notarial Deed, and E received dividends from the deposited money by the defendants. The plaintiff's claim is not reasonable since it is not reasonable for the plaintiff to transfer the above loans to E even if the plaintiff lent 500,000,000 won to the defendants to the defendants.

In addition, the Plaintiff and the Defendants agreed that the repayment period of the above loan will be postponed several times until January 28, 2014, and that no interest would accrue until January 28, 2014. The Defendants agreed that KRW 500,000,000 paid to E on September 9, 2015 should be appropriated for principal.

Therefore, even if the Plaintiff is a creditor, the Defendants repaid the entire loan to the Plaintiff.

B. In a case where the Plaintiff, as a creditor of the instant loan, prepares in writing what terms and conditions of the contract between the parties to the contract are the creditor of the instant loan, if the objective meaning of the text is clear, barring any special circumstance, the existence of declaration of intent and its contents should be recognized. In particular, in a case where interpreting differently from the objective meaning of the text, thereby seriously affecting the legal relations between the parties, the content of

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2019.04.25 2017가단331756

-광주지방법원순천지원 2019.08.20 2018가단81544

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.11.26 2020나22161

-제주지방법원 2019.10.15 2019가단57581

-인천지방법원부천지원 2016.01.14 2015가단108057