급여 등
1. Each of the plaintiffs' appeals is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the court's explanation on this case is the same as the part of the judgment of the first instance, except for the second instance court's 6th trial's 6th trial's 4th trial's 6th trial's 6th trial's 7th 7th 7th 7th 7th 7th 6th 7th 7th 7th 20th 6th 20th 20th 6th 20th 6th 20th 6th 20th 6th 20th 6th 20th 6th 20th 6th 6th 1
2. Parts in height:
C. The above plaintiffs asserted that they lent KRW 40,000,000 to the defendant and KRW 25,00,000 to the plaintiff C and D respectively.
However, the following facts and circumstances, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence as seen earlier, namely, ① Plaintiff C and D alleged that they lent KRW 65,00,000 to the Defendant, a corporate couple, in aggregate, to the Defendant. However, even though they did not prepare a loan certificate, they do not clearly assert the interest rate and maturity maturity (limited to only the rate exceeding 30% per annum). There was no request for repayment of interest or principal to the Defendant before the instant lawsuit was filed. ② Plaintiff C received from the Defendant the money from the Defendant during a relatively long period from June 25, 2010 to July 25, 2013. However, the witness of the first instance trial, who was in charge of the Defendant’s overall financial accounting from around May 201, did not know that there was no reason for the Plaintiff’s offering money to the Defendant and the Defendant’s testimony to the effect that the Plaintiff did not appear.