대여금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. In the absence of dispute, the fact that the Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant the amount of KRW 40 million on May 6, 2004, and KRW 37.5 million on May 9, 2005 is no dispute between the parties.
2. Summary of the parties' arguments;
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion argues that the Defendant transferred the above money to the Defendant, that the Defendant loaned money to the obligee for the purpose of giving a contract for the construction of the freezing warehouse of Pyeongtaek-gu Corporation, which the Defendant intended to construct, and that the Defendant loaned money to the obligee, and that the Defendant sought the return of the said loan since the Defendant gave a contract for the freezing construction of C Corporation to another construction business operator around 2013.
B. The gist of the defendant's assertion argues that the defendant did not borrow money from the plaintiff itself, and that the defendant's real estate was transferred to the defendant while selling the real estate in installments on behalf of the plaintiff.
3. In the event that the money was received and delivered, the Plaintiff asserts that the reason for the receipt of the money was based on a monetary loan for consumption, and the Plaintiff did not submit any evidence supporting that the Defendant newly constructed a freezing warehouse, and that the said money was given to the intent that it was given to the contracting party for the construction work, it is difficult to believe that the entry of the evidence No. 2-1, No. 3 (Certification of Contents), and No. 3 (Certification of Facts) are written and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
4. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.