(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.12.10 2014나12567

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) 수원지방법원 2014.12.10 2014나12567

대여금

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. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence Nos. 1 and 5 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 35,000,000 to the Defendant on June 23, 201, KRW 1,000,000 on June 25, 2011, KRW 24,000 on August 3, 2011, and KRW 35,000,000 on August 18, 201. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 35,00,000 from Nonparty C on April 25, 2012, and around September 26, 2013.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the remainder of 20,000,000 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum as stipulated by the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the day after the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case to the day of full payment.

2. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant asserted that C made a payment of KRW 18,050,748 in total to the Plaintiff from July 1, 2011 to October 24, 201, and that, if C pays KRW 15,00,000 to the Plaintiff around April 25, 2012, C made a payment of KRW 15,000 to the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s payment of KRW 5,00,000 to the Plaintiff was made in full payment of the unpaid loan, and accordingly C made an agreement that it would pay KRW 10,00,000 to the Plaintiff on April 25, 2012, and that the Plaintiff deposited the principal and the interest on September 26, 2013 with the Defendant’s deposit of the principal and the obligation against the Plaintiff was extinguished.

However, according to the statements in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, and 9 as well as the testimony of the witness of the trial of the party C, C, as alleged by the defendant, can be confirmed that C paid money to the plaintiff as alleged by the defendant. However, in full view of the relationship between the plaintiff, the defendant, and C, which can be known by the above evidence, and that C does not have any particular motive for repaying large amount of debt on behalf of the defendant, each of the above evidence alone is insufficient to recognize that C subrogated for the defendant

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2017.12.08 2016가단107650

-울산지방법원 2015.01.15 2014나4071

-광주지방법원해남지원 2016.02.02 2015가단3195

-전주지방법원 2016.12.15 2016가단754

-서울남부지방법원 2018.11.15 2018가합106815