logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.29 2017가단5039224
양수금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. In full view of the respective descriptions in the evidence Nos. 1 and 4 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim and the overall purport of the pleadings, the facts constituting the same cause of the claim (a claim under a loan transaction agreement as of May 31, 200) are recognized, and barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the unpaid principal and interest and delay damages, as stated in the purport of the claim.

2. The Defendant asserts to the effect that “the extinctive prescription has been completed with respect to the instant claim”

In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 4, it can be seen that the lawsuit of this case was filed after the lapse of 10 years from the expiration date of the loan agreement.

Therefore, the above argument by the defendant is reasonable, and the claim in this case was extinguished by the expiration of extinctive prescription.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.

arrow