대여금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On July 12, 2013, the Plaintiff asserts that on December 12, 2013, the Defendant lent KRW 50 million to the Defendant by setting the due date for repayment as the due date for repayment.
On the contrary, the defendant, while lending KRW 50 million to the non-party C, takes custody of the defendant's transfer of KRW 50 million to the non-party C by entrusting the defendant with the duty of creating collateral security and transferring money.
It is asserted that the delivery was only made.
2. According to the evidence No. 1, the fact that the Plaintiff’s Han Bank account was remitted from July 12, 2013 to the Defendant’s foreign exchange bank account is recognized.
However, according to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1-1 through 5 of evidence Nos. 1-5 and the entire pleadings, the defendant, as a certified judicial scrivener on July 12, 2013, remitted to the defendant's national bank account on July 12, 2013, and then remitted the same amount to C at around 17:43 on the same day, and on behalf of the plaintiff and the defendant who provided security for C, on July 29, 2013, filed an application for registration of establishment of a mortgage right holder, the debtor D, the maximum debt amount of KRW 130 million on the ground of the contract on July 12, 2013.
Therefore, in light of the circumstances after the Plaintiff remitted KRW 50 million to the Defendant, it is insufficient to recognize that the above money was leased to the Defendant solely on the ground that the Plaintiff remitted KRW 50 million to the Defendant’s deposit account, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
The plaintiff's assertion is without merit.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed for lack of reason.