기타(금전)
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The plaintiff alleged by the parties against the defendant that had been operating cosmetics in the Hongdong in Seodaemun-gu Seoul from 2009 to 2009, lent KRW 46,881,522 in total to the defendant for the purchase price of goods and the use of operating funds, etc., and sought payment of the remaining KRW 30,981,52 after deducting the amount of KRW 15,90,000 that was partially repaid by the defendant from the defendant among them, and the defendant claimed payment of the remainder of KRW 30,981,522, and the delay damages thereof.
2. Where a person transfers money to another person’s deposit account, etc., the remittance may be made based on various legal causes, such as a loan for consumption, a donation, and a repayment. Therefore, it cannot be readily concluded that there was the intent of the parties to the loan for consumption solely on the fact that such remittance was made. The burden of proving that the remittance was made with such intent is attributable to the person who asserts that the remittance was made based on the loan for consumption.
(see, i.e., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da26187, Jul. 10, 2014). According to each description of evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the Plaintiff is recognized as having transferred a total of KRW 46,881,52 to the Defendant from around 2009. However, in light of the above legal principles, the foregoing circumstance alone cannot be readily concluded that the Plaintiff lent the above money to the Defendant, and it is insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion with each description of evidence Nos. 4 through 7, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.