대여금
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. The plaintiff's primary claim and conjunctive claim are all dismissed.
3...
1. The facts below the basis of facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged in full view of the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 5, and there is no reflective evidence.
F On February 28, 2007, the F was appointed as a manager on March 25, 201 by taking office as the representative director of A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”) and was appointed on March 26, 201. However, on June 15, 201, A was decided to commence the rehabilitation procedure at the Gwangju District Court (Seoul District Court 2012 Gohap8) and appointed the Plaintiff as a manager.
B. A transferred KRW 500 million to Defendant C on February 15, 2011, and KRW 300 million to Defendant D on April 18, 2011.
C. A written a monetary loan agreement between Defendant C, stating that “A made a loan on February 15, 201 with interest rate of KRW 500 million per annum, KRW 8.5% per annum, KRW 18% per annum, and maturity of payment on February 15, 2012,” and that “A made a loan with Defendant D with interest rate of KRW 300 million per annum, KRW 8.5% per annum, KRW 18% per annum, and KRW 18% due date of payment on April 18, 2012.”
2. Judgment on the parties’ assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The primary claim part A extended KRW 50 million to Defendant C and KRW 300 million to Defendant D, and the Defendants are obligated to pay each of the above money and its interest and delay damages to the Plaintiff. 2) Even if the Defendants’ primary claim part is not a loan, but a loan of KRW 800 million to F on December 24, 2008, and actually received reimbursement as the Defendants’ claim, the Defendants’ act of remitting each of the above money constitutes an act of embezzlement of money under the pretext of F’s repayment of personal debt, and as at the time, G was recruited, the Defendants are obligated to pay the above money and its delay damages due to the tort.
B. The purport of the Defendants’ assertion is F’s operating capital.