대여금
1. All claims filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the counterclaim claims by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.
2. Of the costs of lawsuit.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant, on November 19, 2013, sold all the rights to the operation of the C Private Institutes (hereinafter “the instant private teaching institute”) operated by it to the Plaintiff and Nonparty D, and decided to sell the building on each of the above land (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate” after combining each of the above land and buildings; hereinafter “the instant building”) 640 million won to the Cheongju-si E-gu, Cheongju-gu, Seoul, where the said private teaching institute was located, and 270.7m263m2, and 263m263m2, and each of the above land on each of the above land (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) to the Plaintiff, and the down payment of KRW 20 million on each of the contract, intermediate payment, KRW 10 million on the same day, and the remainder payment of KRW 1,600,000,000,000,000 for each of the instant real estate was established in lieu of the payment of each of the instant mortgage.
(B) The above sales contract entered into between the Defendant and D (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).
D paid to the Plaintiff KRW 30 million in total the down payment and intermediate payment as stipulated in the instant sales contract, and around December 1, 2013, the Plaintiff returned each of the instant real estate to the Defendant on November 3, 2014.
[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 2
2. Determination on the main claim
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff: (a) acquired and operated the instant driving school operated by the Defendant; and (b) during the process of acquiring a driving school, the Defendant borrowed KRW 7.4 million from the Plaintiff, including KRW 7.5 million on November 29, 2013 and KRW 6.5 million on December 2, 2013; (c) the Defendant received tuition fees from three original students at the time of operating the instant driving school; and (d) provided the Plaintiff with education for the said original students while taking over the instant driving school, and thus, the Plaintiff did not refund KRW 3 million during the period of education to the Plaintiff, thereby seeking payment of the said money.
(b) judgment;