logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.21 2017나15668
부당이득금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. (1) On December 14, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a guarantee insurance contract with B for the purpose of guaranteeing the livelihood of the Plaintiff. The amount of insurance coverage: 51,803,810 won: Guarantee content of Korean Teachers’ and Staff Mutual Aid Association; 2) A was not repaid after receiving a loan from Korean Teachers and Staff Mutual Aid Association under a guarantee of the Plaintiff’s payment; and the Plaintiff paid KRW 49,932,660 of the insurance money upon receiving the claim of the insurance money from Korean Teachers and Staff Mutual Aid Association.

3) The Plaintiff filed an application with the Seoul Central District Court for a payment order against B for the payment of indemnity amounting to KRW 50,917,630 on February 4, 2014. The said court shall provide that “B shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 50,917,630 (i.e., principal KRW 49,932,660 (=6% per annum from October 12, 2013 to November 10, 2013; and 984,970 won per annum from the next day to January 9, 2014) and the amount of KRW 49,932,60 among them, KRW 15% per annum from January 10, 2014 to the delivery date of the original payment order; and damages for delay calculated at a rate of 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment (hereinafter “instant payment order”).

(B) On July 16, 2010, the above payment order was issued and confirmed on June 3, 2014. (b) On July 16, 2010, the Defendant’s No. 395, a notary public made and issued a notarial deed under a monetary loan agreement (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) stating that “B borrowed KRW 360 million from the Defendant on April 1, 2007, setting the maturity of the Defendant at 10% per annum, and borrowed KRW 10 million per annum, and if B fails to perform the above monetary obligation, it was immediately recognized that there is no objection even if compulsory execution.”

2 The defendant is, based on the notarial deed of this case, the teacher of the high school as the Suwon District Court 2010 Taz15721 on July 29, 2010.

arrow