logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.21 2016가단5305856
대여금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 26,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from February 7, 2017 to November 21, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 11, 2014, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 60,000,000 from the Plaintiff’s passbook to the Defendant’s passbook.

B. The Defendant: 00,000 won per month from March 18, 2014 to January 15, 2016; 10,000,000 won on January 15, 2016; 2,00,000 won on February 12, 2016; 00,000 won on March 17, 2016; 00,000,000,000 won on March 31, 2016; 1,00,000,000,00 won on March 31, 2016; 1,000,00 won on April 1, 2016; 1,000,00 won on May 14, 2016; 1,000,00 won on June 16, 200, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As alleged and determined, the Plaintiff asserted that KRW 60,00,00 transferred by the Plaintiff is interest rate of KRW 20,000 per annum, and KRW 10,00,000 remitted on January 15, 2016, KRW 3,000,00 remitted on March 31, 2016, KRW 10,000 remitted on June 16, 2016, and KRW 1,000,00 remitted on July 11, 2016, and KRW 25,00,000,000 transferred on September 29, 206, as principal and interest rate of KRW 10,000,000 (= KRW 10,000,000,000,000,000), and paid damages for delay as principal and interest of KRW 30,00,000,00.

The defendant asserts that KRW 60,000,000, transferred by the plaintiff, is not a loan at the beginning, but a donation. The defendant's deposit at C's passbook was made by the plaintiff and the defendant voluntarily returned to the plaintiff. Even if the loan is a loan, the loan must be deducted from the principal due to the lack of an agreement on interest, so the amount to be returned is more than KRW 3,000,000,000.

In full view of the following facts: (a) the first letter of evidence, the first letter of evidence, the first letter of evidence, and the whole statement of evidence Nos. 2 through 9 (including the number of branch numbers) and the whole purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff, an attorney-at-law, is a guest with the Fju points located in the original E-U.S. building from the wintering time of February 2013.

arrow