logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.27 2017나68006
채무부존재확인
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: (a) the statement of the Defendants’ debt certificates to be set up under the fourth sentence below the third sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) the following additional determination is the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding “the preparation of the Plaintiffs’ debt certificates” to “the preparation of the Plaintiffs’ debt certificates.”

2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiffs are emphasized or new arguments as follows in the first instance.

(1) The debt agreement of this case was made with the aim of responding to the audit of the insolvent loan of the ESS without the intent of the plaintiffs to bear the obligations. The declaration of intent indicated in the debt agreement constitutes a false declaration of intent made in collusion with the ESS and thus null and void pursuant to Article 108 of the Civil Act, or is deemed null and void pursuant to the proviso of Article 107(1) of the Civil Act, because the defendant, the other party, is aware that

(2) The preparation of the debt certificate of this case is nothing more than a paper necessary for audit and inspection, and it is reasonable to think that the plaintiffs are no meaningful documents by deceiving the plaintiffs. As such, the declaration of intent based on the debt certificate of this case is revoked by mistake or fraud.

(3) Unless otherwise, a mutual aid agreement loan is not established since it was not established by the plaintiffs but by F. Therefore, as long as the loan contract was not established, the plaintiffs cannot ratification through the preparation of the debt certificate in this case, and even if the mutual aid agreement loan was not established, it is merely invalid and not invalid.

Even if the plaintiffs knew that the loan of mutual aid terms is null and void, the act of invalidation is ratified only when the plaintiffs prepare the debt certificate of this case with knowledge that it is null and void.

(4) In addition, ① the F has obtained a loan under the name of the Plaintiffs through fabrication of private documents and such events, ② the F.

arrow