대여금등
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claim selectively added in the trial are all dismissed.
2. After an appeal is filed.
1. The reasons why the court should explain this case are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the court added the judgment on the claim for return of unjust enrichment which was selectively added in the trial below, and thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
[Judgment on the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment] The plaintiff is the owner of each real estate of this case, and the defendant bears acquisition tax and registration tax. However, since the plaintiff bears acquisition tax, etc. as 210 million won out of 3,099,750,000 won from his own loan of 3,09,750,000 won, the defendant is liable to pay 21,42 million won to the plaintiff upon fulfilling the obligation to return unjust enrichment. However, the plaintiff's transfer of 21,42 million won to the 111020591937 of the new bank to the 11102059,1937, 200 million won from the new bank to the 3,099,750,000 won from the defendant, the plaintiff did not pay acquisition tax and registration tax for each real estate of this case on behalf of the defendant. Rather, the plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff received 3,099,750,000 won from the defendant's.
2. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal and the claim which is selectively added in the trial are dismissed as it is without merit.