대여금반환
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added in the trial are all dismissed.
2. After an appeal is filed.
1. Basic facts
A. C established, on July 2, 2013, a corporation E (hereinafter “E”) conducting real estate sales agency business, etc., and took office as the representative director. The Plaintiff was the head of E from E to the office, and the Defendant was the telephone counselor.
B. The Defendant reported the purchase price of KRW 830,00,000 on August 5, 2013, 2013, which was the third sale date of Pyeongtaek-si D, and the payment deadline was set on September 16, 2013 by the highest bidder. The Defendant was determined as of November 29, 2013 as follows: (a) the purchase price of KRW 830,000,000 on August 5, 2013, which was the third sale date of Pyeongtaek-si D; (b) the payment deadline was set as of September 16, 2013.
C. On September 10, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 45,000,000, and KRW 31,560,000 on September 16, 2013, to the national bank account (Account Number K) in the name of the Defendant, respectively.
The defendant paid the purchase price of the instant land on September 16, 2013, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the defendant with respect to the instant land.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-4, Eul evidence 2-2, Eul evidence 10-5, Eul evidence 11, Eul evidence 1-1, Eul evidence 12-1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the main loan claim
A. The Plaintiff, the primary cause of the claim, upon receiving a request from C to lend money from the Defendant, confirmed the Defendant’s intention, and thereafter lent KRW 76,560,000 to the Defendant the successful bid price of the instant land.
B. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 30,00,000 to the above new bank account of C on September 13, 2013, and C also used the instant money to transfer the purchase price to the account under the Defendant’s name, and C transferred KRW 31,560,000 to the Plaintiff on September 16, 2013 (the same amount of money transaction was erroneous and the Plaintiff also received a request for a loan from C, so the said money appears to have been immediately returned to the Plaintiff) and also the evidence presented.