대여금
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On December 29, 201, the Defendant alleged the Plaintiff’s assertion offered CNS vehicles owned by the Defendant as collateral, and the Plaintiff did not disclose specific personal information, such as the Nonparty’s name.
The Plaintiff borrowed KRW 15 million from the Nonparty on January 29, 2012 as the due date for repayment. After paying KRW 12.5 million to the Nonparty, the Plaintiff acquired the claim for the borrowed amount of KRW 15 million from the Nonparty, based on the Defendant’s prior consent to the transfer of the claim for the borrowed amount of KRW 15 million against the Nonparty. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the borrowed amount of KRW 15 million.
2. Therefore, first of all, as to whether the defendant borrowed KRW 15 million from the non-party as above, the defendant did not have any evidence of borrowing No. 1, Gap evidence No. 7, Gap evidence No. 8, Gap evidence No. 9, and Gap evidence No. 9, and there is no evidence to acknowledge the authenticity (the whole purport of the pleading is that both the papers written in the above documents are the defendant's husband, and it appears that D arbitrarily uses the defendant's name). The above evidence cannot be used as evidence, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
Therefore, the prior plaintiff's assertion on a different premise is without merit to examine further.
3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance with different conclusions is unfair, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.