logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.09.13 2018가단109353
대여금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay 80,000,000 won to the plaintiff and 15% per annum from March 1, 2018 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. The following facts are either in dispute between the parties or in full view of Gap evidence 1, 6-2, Eul evidence 1-1, 2, 2-4 and the purport of the whole pleadings.

A. The Defendant is the Plaintiff’s act of raising marriage awareness around June 27, 2015 and reporting marriage around that time.

B. On March 3, 2015, C and the Defendant concluded a housing lease agreement on an officetel located in Mapo-si as a lessee on March 3, 2015, with C as the lessee.

The lease deposit was KRW 190,000,000, among which 50,000 won was loaned from financial institutions in the name of C, and the remainder was appropriated by C and the Defendant for the money collected.

C. On April 3, 2015, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 80,000,00 to the Defendant’s account, and KRW 50,000,000, a part of the remitted money, was used to repay the money that C had received from the financial institution.

2. The allegations and judgment of the parties

A. The plaintiff's assertion of the parties above 1.C.

In regard to the claim for return of KRW 80,000,00, which was remitted to the Defendant’s account, the Defendant asserted that the said money was leased to the Defendant, and that the said money was donated to C as a marriage fund by the Plaintiff’s wife, and that the Defendant did not have any obligation to return it.

B. Whether the loan is a loan - In light of the fact that the Plaintiff, in addition to the above money, did not separately prepare the marriage of the Defendant who is his/her father, the above money is not a loan, but there is no room to regard it as the money that the Plaintiff donated to his/her married couple by being born to the married couple in the formation of the new marriage house. However, in light of the following facts and circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the above money is a loan made to his/her husband without any agreement for the Plaintiff’s due date, and that it is a loan made to his/her witness E’s testimony, based on the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 3 through 5 (the name omitted; hereinafter the same shall apply), 10, and 5 as well as the overall purport of the pleading.

1. A parent C shall be his parent.

arrow