logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.06.03 2014가단18906
대여금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 22, 2008, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 30 million to the Agricultural Cooperative Account under the name of the Defendant, and transferred KRW 9 million to the same account on June 22, 2008.

B. The Defendant, as the Plaintiff’s children, had a resident registration for about 15 years from around 1999 to 2014, and operated a community life as a husband and wife.

C. The Defendant and C, around April to May 2008, entered the deposit amount of KRW 80 million to the deposit amount of KRW 120 million, and the deposit amount of KRW 120 million was written in C’s name.

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

2. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant loaned money due to a shortage of money in the coffee shop opening business, and lent 30 million won on April 22, 2008, and borrowed c. 9 million won on June 222, 2008. Thus, the defendant is obligated to repay the above borrowed money to the plaintiff.

In this regard, the defendant asserted that the plaintiff was living in his own son, and he remitted the above 30 million won to the defendant, and that the defendant and C used the above 30 million won as deposit money, as a director with the deposit money of 120 million won from the deposit money of 80 million won to the deposit money of 120 million won around May 2008, and that the plaintiff remitted the money of 90 million won to be used as the deposit money of C, and that the plaintiff did not borrow money from the plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. Since a loan for consumption is established when one of the parties agrees to transfer the ownership of money or other substitutes to the other party, and the other party agrees to return the same kind, quality, and quantity, it is natural that the parties have to agree on the above point.

(Supreme Court Decision 2010Da41263, 41270 Decided November 11, 201). Moreover, in the event of a transfer of money to another person’s deposit account, such transfer is a loan for consumption, donation, repayment, and simple.

arrow