beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.07.06 2017나29387

대여금

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same reasoning as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment of the defendant to the conjunctive assertion added by the court below, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant remitted KRW 2,00,000 to the Plaintiff as the repayment for the “loan of KRW 25,000,000 on July 8, 2014” on June 9, 2015, and that the Defendant remitted KRW 2,00,000 to the Plaintiff as the repayment for the “Loan of KRW 40,000,000 on September 30, 2015” on February 21, 2016, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant remitted KRW 2,00,00 to the Plaintiff as the repayment for the “Loan of KRW 40,000,00,000 on September 30, 2015, as alleged by the Defendant, according to the written evidence Nos. 2 and 8, the fact that the Defendant remitted the said money to the Plaintiff, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that said money was paid as the repayment for the said money.

B. The Defendant’s judgment as to the allegation of offset: (a) the Defendant lent KRW 1,70,000 to the Plaintiff, KRW 1,000,00 on November 28, 2014, KRW 1,000 on May 8, 2015, and KRW 4,000 on July 27, 2015; and (b) the Plaintiff sold the clothes from the Defendant and paid the price for the goods; and (c) the unpaid price for the goods was 22,00,000,000 won in total; (d) the Defendant asserted that the above loan claim and the price for the goods should be offset on an amount equal to each loan claim of the Plaintiff against the Defendant; (e) however, there is no reason to acknowledge the Defendant’s loan claim and the price for the goods; and (e) there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.