대여금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The defendant bears the total costs of the lawsuit after the filing of the appeal.
purport, purport, and.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the judgment that the defendant added to or supplemented by the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable as it is in accordance with the main sentence of
2. Additional or Supplementary parts
A. First, the defendant asserts that each of the loans of this case was borrowed by C, not the defendant, and even if the defendant borrowed it, it is invalid as a false conspiracy.
First, as to the first loan (50 million won) of this case, if the disposal document was duly established, the court must recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the language stated in the disposal document, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof that denies the contents of the written statement in the disposal document. A person who claims that a certain declaration of intent is null and void as a false declaration of intention must prove the facts constituting the reason.
(2) On January 18, 2011, the Plaintiff prepared a loan certificate (Evidence A 1) stating that the Plaintiff would lend KRW 40 million to the Defendant on January 18, 2011, as seen earlier. In other words, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff, upon the Defendant’s introduction of the Defendant, recommended investment from friendly Defendant to make a transfer of the loan. However, the Plaintiff paid the loan after receiving the above loan certificate, and the Defendant additionally prepared and delivered the loan certificate stating KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff on February 7, 2011. In full view of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff borrowed the loan of this case as the person who borrowed the loan of this case was the person who borrowed the loan of this case, and it is evident that the content of the above disposition is denied, and it is not acceptable to accept it.
Next, with respect to the defendant's defense of false conspiracy, the health unit and C are the plaintiff.