beta
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.01.26 2016가단113730

대여금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. On April 20, 2015, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 150,000,000,000 in the AFC account (Account Number E; hereinafter “instant account”); F’s corporate bank account; F’s corporate bank account; Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”); Defendant B’s KRW 14.15,00,000 on April 14, 2016; and KRW 15.1,00,000 on April 18, 2016; and KRW 50,000,000,000 on April 18, 2016; Defendant B’s net and I’s incidental parent, which had been the former representative director of the Defendant Co., Ltd, did not conflict between the parties; or may not be recognized differently from the evidence number No. 13 through No. 3 (including evidence No. 3).

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On April 20, 2015, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 150 million from the DefendantB and the J to make an investment in the aggregate business at the time of the Gu-U.S., on the same day, on the condition that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 150 million from the F to the Defendant B by borrowing KRW 150 million from the Fund. The Defendant Company, on April 1, 2016, paid KRW 20 million to the Plaintiff, thereby granting the above loan obligations. The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff did not lend the said KRW 150 million to the Defendants, but did not transfer the said KRW 150 million to the Defendant Company to the Defendant Company (hereinafter “K”), and that the Plaintiff, the actual representative of the Defendant Company, obtained the Plaintiff’s investment from the Defendant Company, and requested the Plaintiff to participate in the said business by accepting the Plaintiff’s request for the payment of KRW 150 million from the Plaintiff.

B. Determination 1) Even if there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that money has been received, when the Defendant contests the Plaintiff’s assertion that the lending was made, the Plaintiff bears the burden of proving the lending (see Supreme Court Decisions 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972; 72Da221, Jul. 10, 2014).