대여금
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.
The defendant.
The plaintiff asserts that he lent KRW 70 million to the defendant as a start-up fund for the defendant's main acquisition of the main points, while the defendant asserts that he received the above start-up fund from the plaintiff who was in an internal relationship with the plaintiff as a gift.
Judgment
If the purport of the argument is added to Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 11, and the fact-finding results with respect to D, the foundation of this Court, the plaintiff paid the defendant the main acquisition fund of this case to the defendant who intends to take over the main points of "E" from the defendant who has been repaid several times of money to the defendant who was in a relationship with the plaintiff on July 20, 2015, the total amount of KRW 50 million on July 21, 2015, KRW 70 million on July 21, 2015, and KRW 70 million on the total amount of KRW 70 million (hereinafter "the main acquisition fund of this case"). The plaintiff and the defendant did not provide the plaintiff with a certificate of borrowing the main acquisition fund of this case and the existing monetary transaction, the plaintiff paid the main acquisition fund of this case to the defendant with the loan borrowed from F, the defendant suggested that the plaintiff use the funds of this case to the plaintiff on December 22, 2015, and 300 others.
Even if the plaintiff was in an internal relationship as above, it cannot be readily concluded that the plaintiff was a donation to the defendant in light of the fact that the plaintiff paid interest to the defendant in order to pay KRW 70 million for the main acquisition of this case, and that it cannot be concluded that the plaintiff was a donation to the defendant. The plaintiff had lent money to the defendant several times without preparing a loan certificate, and the defendant returned the funds for the main acquisition of this case to the plaintiff.