logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.04.12 2018나2022075
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.

2. After filing an appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts are stated in this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and such reasoning is identical to that of the judgment of the court of first instance. Accordingly, this is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that C, the Defendant’s wife of the Co-Defendant C of the first instance trial, constitutes the Defendant’s obligation to borrow money for daily home affairs, or that the Defendant jointly and severally with C to pay the instant loan amount, and thus, C is jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 1,121,724,358 and delay damages.

B. (1) As to the assertion that a juristic act on a daily basis constitutes a common family obligation, the “legal act on a daily basis” under Article 832 of the Civil Act refers to a juristic act normally required for a couple’s community life. As such, whether a juristic act in question concerns a daily home life ought to be determined by comprehensively taking into account the intent and purpose of the person who performed the juristic act along with the objective type or nature of the juristic act, the actual living conditions of the couple,

(B) In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant’s use of money borrowed from the Plaintiff in the list of creditors submitted by C while filing a petition for bankruptcy may be acknowledged either as “living expenses, operating expenses, and credit card payment,” and as indicated in the evidence No. 12 and No. 22, the Defendant’s use of modern automobiles purchased on September 17, 2015, among which the payment was made from the E bank account in the name of C and the payment was made.

(C) However, the aforementioned evidence reveals that Gap evidence Nos. 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 7, 8, 10, 11, 16, 20, and 21, and each statement of evidence Nos. 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 21, and each order to submit financial transaction information to E, F, and G companies

arrow