대여금반환
1. The judgment of the first instance, including the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s principal claim expanded from the trial, is as follows:
1. The reasoning for the court's explanation on this case is that the defendant's assertion on title trust is insufficient to recognize the defendant's assertion on this case, and each statement in the evidence Nos. 40 through 44 (including a serial number, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) is rejected (as alleged by the defendant, even if the plaintiff acquired the ownership of some or all of the real estate of this case pursuant to a contract title trust agreement that is null and void, the defendant can only seek a return of unjust enrichment by proving the purchase fund provided to the plaintiff, and in this case, no difference exists between the conclusion of this case and the conclusion of this case) and the "90,000,000 won" in Part No. 16 of the judgment of the court of first instance as "74,46,138 won", and the April 1, 27.
Paragraph (1) shall be deleted, and part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except in addition to the determination of the parties in the trial as follows, since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the parties in the trial.
2. 2.A among the judgments of the first instance that have been used or added.
(2) If the purport of the entire argument is added to the above facts of recognition (B), (c) [7 to 8] (B), the following circumstances may be revealed.
In addition to the loans of KRW 140,00,000 as stated in the above paragraph (1), the Plaintiff appears to have lent money from time to time without obtaining a loan certificate. From July 2010 to January 201, the Plaintiff received KRW 13,500,000 per month interest on the loan from the Defendant.
(C) The Plaintiff seems to have requested the Defendant to prepare the instant confirmation document in order to settle the interest that was not paid after the release of the Plaintiff on March 15, 2011.
In the meantime, 5% specified in Paragraph 2 of the letter of confirmation of this case refers to 5% per month interest rate, 4% per month interest rate, and 4% per month interest rate, respectively.