logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.06.29 2016나2040086
대여금
Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant exceeding the money ordered to be paid below is cited.

Reasons

1. Judgment on the part cited in the Plaintiff’s claim

A. On August 26, 2008, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 65 million to the Defendant on August 26, 2008.

[Based on recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 23-1, and 2-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings (2) on Nov. 12, 2008, the plaintiff lent to the defendant a notarial deed as to a loan for consumption under a monetary loan contract for consumption (ii) on Feb. 5, 2008, the amount of KRW 50 million on Jul. 16, 2008, KRW 60 million on Aug. 7, 2008, KRW 90 million on Aug. 7, 2008, KRW 40 million on Oct. 16, 2008, KRW 10 million on a similar date, and KRW 250 million on Nov. 12, 2008.

[Based on recognition, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 20-1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings, and (3) the deposit for the sales contract of recycled goods (A) on November 17, 2009 (A) and the defendant supplied the plaintiff on November 7, 2009, entered into a contract with the plaintiff to collect it, and the plaintiff paid to the defendant KRW 10 million on October 31, 2009, KRW 110 million on November 17, 2009, KRW 66 million on November 30, 2010, and KRW 186 million on the aggregate.

(B) The above sales contract for recyclables was terminated on November 16, 2012.

[Grounds for recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 13-1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings (4) as to the contract for the sale and purchase of recycled products as of September 21, 201 (No.4) and the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a contract for the collection of the goods to the plaintiff on September 21, 2011, and the plaintiff paid 50 million won to the defendant around that time.

(B) The above sales contract for recyclables was terminated on September 21, 2013.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 5-1, 2, 3, and Gap evidence Nos. 15, the purport of the whole pleadings (5) is as of January 9, 2012.

arrow