대여금
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiff's assertion was made by leasing KRW 20,000,000 to the defendant around October 5, 2007 and preparing a cash custody certificate. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the above KRW 20,000,000 to the plaintiff and delay damages therefor.
B. The Defendant’s assertion was an operator of a collaborative company that supplies a household for business purposes to the company where the Defendant was working. The Defendant, after retirement, arranged a university dormitory supply contract to the Plaintiff, and received the said money from the Plaintiff as business expenses.
However, the plaintiff requested the defendant to prepare a cash custody certificate in the event that the delivery contract for the future is not a sexual intention, and accordingly, the defendant prepared a cash custody certificate for KRW 20,000 to the plaintiff.
Since the Defendant arranged to supply a dormitory to several schools, and the Plaintiff also supplied a household by entering into an actual household supply contract, the Defendant is not obligated to pay the above money to the Plaintiff.
2. The following facts are written between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on October 5, 2007 by the cash custody certificate (hereinafter “the cash custody certificate of this case”). There is no dispute between the parties.
(20,000,000)The above amount shall be received on October 5, 2007, and this Certificate shall be drawn up and signed and sealed in order to ensure the receipt (storage) of the above amount.
On October 5, 2007, the defendant's assertion that the custodian's address was paid the above KRW 20,000,000 from the plaintiff as business expenses, and the witness E of the first instance court, who seems to conform to the plaintiff's argument, is persuasive, in view of the following circumstances that there is no dispute between the parties, or considering the overall purport of the entries and arguments in the evidence No. 4, No. 1, No. 5, and No. 200,000, in consideration of the following circumstances: