beta
(영문) 창원지방법원통영지원 2017.10.26 2017가합21

대여금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, the father of the Defendant, died on August 22, 1977, when the Plaintiff and the Defendant owned a 1,464m2 (hereinafter “Before land substitution”).

B. On December 5, 1984, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on land before replotting due to sale on April 10, 1974 pursuant to the Act on Special Measures for the Registration, etc. of Ownership of Real Estate (Act No. 3562, hereinafter “Special Measures Act”).

C. The land before replotting was replaced with 1,940 square meters for land substitution under the Farmland Improvement Act on February 7, 1995 (hereinafter “after replotting”). D. The land before replotting was replaced with the land after replotting.

After replotting, the Plaintiff sold the land to the Gold Industry Machinery Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “gold Industry Machinery”), and on January 23, 2007, gold Industry Machinery remitted the purchase price of KRW 387 million to the account of community credit cooperatives under the Plaintiff’s name.

E. The gold industry machinery completed the registration of ownership transfer on February 1, 2007 for land after replotting on February 26, 2007.

F. On January 26, 2007, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 256 million to the Defendant.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1-1, Eul evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 2 and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the land was donated by his father C before replotting. In 1984, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Plaintiff pursuant to the Act on Special Measures for Land Change, with the consent of the mother and the Defendant, including the Defendant.

Afterwards, the Plaintiff sold the land to the gold industry machinery in 2007 and received the sales amount. The Defendant, who became aware of the fact, lent money to the Plaintiff and lent KRW 256 million to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant shall pay the principal of the borrowed money and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. The land before the Defendant’s assertion was inherited to the heir, including the Plaintiff, due to C’s death.