(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.10.31 2016가단134096

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.10.31 2016가단134096

대여금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that around November 18, 2014, the Plaintiff lent KRW 100,000 to the Defendant and around February 26, 2015, the Plaintiff received a certificate of borrowing (No. 1; hereinafter “the instant certificate of borrowing”) stating that “81,70,000 won shall be repaid within one year, including interest,” from the Defendant. The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of the loan amounting to KRW 81,70,000,000, excluding KRW 18,300,000.

B. The defendant's assertion that there is no sign or seal on the loan certificate of this case with money borrowed from the plaintiff.

However, the defendant is "E" after the plaintiff's husband C and D are in partnership with the plaintiff's husband E.

Around November 18, 2014, C borrowed KRW 100,000,000 from C.

At the time of borrowing, the Defendant agreed to repay KRW 2,200,000 per month, and C paid and settled the same in D's business account, and as a result, D's business relationship was settled, the above loan was fully repaid.

2. Determination

(a) If the stamp image of the person who signed the document is affixed with the seal affixed thereto, the authenticity of the stamp image shall be presumed to have been made, and if the authenticity of the stamp image is presumed to have been made, the authenticity of the entire document shall be presumed to have been made, but if it is proved that the act of affixing the seal was made by a person other than the person who signed the document, the presumption shall be broken. Therefore, the person who submitted the document shall be liable to prove that the act of affixing the

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da37831 Decided September 24, 2009, etc.). B.

There is no dispute between the parties that the seal affixed on the loan certificate of this case is affixed with the seal of the defendant.

However, according to the following circumstances, the Defendant’s seal affixed to the loan certificate of this case, which is recognized as comprehensively considering the contents of the evidence Nos. 1 through 6, shall be affixed with the Defendant’s seal kept by C.

참조판례

-대법원 2009. 9. 24. 선고 2009다37831 판결

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2017.11.17 2016가단11052

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.12.24 2018나77540

-서울고등법원 2019.12.20 2019나2010987

-청주지방법원제천지원 2017.09.06 2016가단2730

-서울동부지방법원 2019.01.17 2017가합344