대여금
1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are all dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each person.
claim, purport of claim,
1. The Plaintiff sought a loan of KRW 55 million against the Defendant and compensation of KRW 55 million (affirmative 45 million, solatium 10 million, and solatium 10 million). The court of first instance accepted the loan claim in full, while citing the claim of the above loan, the court of first instance accepted the claim of KRW 48 million (affirmative 45 million, solatium 3 million), and dismissed the remainder of the claim.
Accordingly, the defendant appealed only to the part of the lost claim for damages, and the plaintiff appealed to the part of the lost claim for solatium.
Therefore, the scope of this court's adjudication is limited to the claim.
2. The reasoning of the court of first instance, other than the addition of the following, is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, the grounds for appeal by both parties are cited as they are (the grounds for appeal by the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the first instance, and even based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of first instance and the evidence additionally submitted by the defendant in this court, it is deemed legitimate to recognize and determine the facts of first instance). 3. The defendant's additional determination as to the defendant's assertion was merely known of the fact that the joint defendant B (hereinafter "B") of the first instance court of first instance (hereinafter "B") knew of the fact that 5 million won was brought about by the plaintiff, and it was merely aiding and abetting the plaintiff's specific acts without knowing the intention and specific acts, and the plaintiff's liability for damages suffered by the plaintiff's tort of this case is also unjust.
In a civil trial, even if it is not bound by the recognition of facts in a criminal trial, the fact that the criminal judgment already finalized on the same factual basis is material evidence, and thus, it is true in the criminal trial in light of other evidence submitted in the civil trial.