logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.07.20 2016가단108219
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

On June 29, 2015, the primary Plaintiff loaned KRW 29.9 million to the Defendant at the rate of 48 months of loan, interest rate of KRW 11.9% per annum, interest rate of KRW 28.9% per annum, and interest rate of KRW 28.9% per annum. The Defendant claims for payment of the amount claimed as the remainder of interest and delay damages that the Defendant lost the benefit of January 13, 2016.

In this regard, there is no evidence to acknowledge the authenticity of No. 1 (a loan application) proving that the Plaintiff loaned the Defendant.

Rather, in full view of the overall purport of the pleadings as a result of the review of the evidence No. 8, evidence No. 1 recognizes that the Defendant’s each type B was prepared by using the Defendant’s name, and there is no evidence to deem that B was delegated by the Defendant with the right to make a loan application or the right to make a loan application

Therefore, the plaintiff's primary claim based on the premise that a loan agreement was concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant is without merit.

The plaintiff in the preliminary claim filed a claim for damages equivalent to the amount of the loan remaining after the defendant neglected to open and manage the account in his name and aids and abets the illegal act in B, since the repayment of the loan was made in installments from the account in his name.

In full view of the whole purport of the pleadings as to the statement No. 5, the defendant is not sufficient to recognize that the defendant again transferred money deposited to the defendant's account at the request of B to the plaintiff's virtual account once again, and further, there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the defendant was negligent by not knowing that his account was used as a tort, such as the defendant's use of it as a tort.

Therefore, the defendant's conjunctive claim is without merit.

Therefore, all of the plaintiff's main and conjunctive claims are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow