대여금
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1.The following facts do not conflict between the Parties:
On September 8, 2012, the plaintiff's births C and the defendant are married married couple, and on May 15, 2015, the divorce lawsuit is pending by the plaintiff's filing of a lawsuit by C.
B. On September 5, 2012, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 25,000,00 to the Defendant.
C. In addition, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 6,600,000,000 to the Defendant’s Defendant’s operating funds, respectively, as KRW 3,00,00 on January 11, 2013, and KRW 3,00,000 on February 1, 2013.
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that the Defendant respectively lent KRW 19,60,000,00 on September 5, 2012 and KRW 11,20 on January 11, 2013 and February 1, 2013, and that the Plaintiff returned the said amount.
3. Determination
A. Even if considering the circumstances alleged by the Plaintiff, including the Plaintiff’s claim for a loan of KRW 25,00,000 on September 5, 2012, the Plaintiff received the loan and remitted the said money to the Defendant upon the Plaintiff’s request, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the interest on the loan, and the Defendant asked the Plaintiff to extend the maturity of one year, it is inevitable to borrow money in business name from a person to be wife prior to the marriage and according to the evidence evidence Nos. 1 and 7, the Defendant appears to have paid the said money at the marriage and the marriage beauty cost. In light of the above circumstances and the evidence presented by the Plaintiff, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff lent the said money to the Defendant solely based on the above circumstances and the evidence presented by the Plaintiff.
B. On January 11, 2013, a claim for a loan of KRW 19,600,000 on the ground of the claim is asserted as follows: (i) the Plaintiff loaned KRW 6,600,000 to the Defendant on January 11, 2013, and KRW 3,000,000 on February 1, 2013, there is no dispute between the parties; and (ii) the Defendant is obligated to pay the above loan and the damages for delay to the Plaintiff on the ground of the Defendant’s repayment. (ii) The Defendant’s judgment on the grounds of the repayment of the loan was fully repaid.
Gap evidence 8, Eul evidence 3, 4, and 8 are the purport of the whole pleadings.