대여금
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The defendant's main defense against the defendant is merely the fact that he purchased the Pianno from C. Thus, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case against the defendant, claiming payment of the Pianno price, which is unlawful, is raised by a person who is not a party standing.
However, in a lawsuit for performance, standing to sue is a person who asserts that he/she has the right to demand performance, which is a subject matter of lawsuit, and whether or not he/she has the right to demand performance has the right to demand performance shall be proved through the deliberation of the merits (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Da44387, 44394, Oct. 7, 2005). As long as the plaintiff asserts that he/she has the right to demand the payment of purchase price
2. The assertion and judgment on the merits
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is based on the agreement between September 27, 2004 and August 21, 2018 on the annual interest rate of KRW 24% from September 27, 2004 and the interest rate of KRW 5,736,758, and the Plaintiff’s performance on behalf of the Defendant’s debtor, and the expenses related thereto are all borne by the Defendant. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s performance of collection procedures against D and E and the Defendant’s debtor, and all of the expenses related thereto are KRW 1,683,860 (= KRW 436,160, KRW 1,247,70), total amount of KRW 9,140,618.
Of them, the remaining 6,114,581 won and its delay damages shall be claimed after deducting 136,037 won from the refund of the real estate auction procedure for E, and 2,890,000 won and the real estate auction procedure for E.
It is interpreted that the purport of the plaintiff's claim and the evidence No. 52 No. 1 are the same.
B. (1) In light of the respective statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 30, 50, 54 and the whole purport of the pleadings, the plaintiff sold to the defendant on July 27, 2004, triino A/W (e.g., e. e., T-high-class). The defendant paid 1,720,000 won to the defendant on September 27, 2004, but the defendant shall be paid until September 27, 2004.