대여금
1. The Defendant: (a) 2,640,000 won to Plaintiff B and 5% per annum from March 3, 2016 to March 31, 2016; and (b).
1. The Plaintiff A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff CF”) is a private teaching institute teaching tests, such as GMAT and Saturdays.
The Defendant is an instructor with the GMA language ability working from January 201 to January 2015 at the Plaintiff’s language institute.
Plaintiff
B is the internal director of the Plaintiff’s fish farming institute and the GMAT repair ability part, and the husband of D, the representative director of the Plaintiff’s fish farming institute.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1
2. Determination as to the plaintiffs' loan claims
A. The gist of the Plaintiffs’ assertion 1) As between February 18, 2013 and October 15, 2014, Plaintiff LAC lent KRW 21,70,000 to the Defendant on nine occasions during the period from February 18, 2013 to October 15, 2014, and received KRW 9,50,000 among them. The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff’s LAC amounting to KRW 12,20,000 (= KRW 21,700,000 - KRW 9,50,000) to the Defendant. (2) As between December 30, 2011 and January 3, 2015, Plaintiff B lent KRW 48,051,120 over several occasions to the Defendant, and the amount received among them reaches KRW 29,631,120,120.
The defendant is obligated to pay 29,631,120 won to the plaintiff B.
B. 1) The Plaintiff’s fish driving school did not fully deduct the Plaintiff’s tuition fees from March 2012 to August 2012. (2) The Plaintiff’s fish driving school deducted KRW 1,00,000 from the Plaintiff’s payment of tuition fees to the Defendant on September 2012. However, in the details of the Plaintiff’s payment of tuition fees, the reason for the deduction is “other than the amount of LA special lecture”. The following deduction amount is written as KRW 1,340,000.
3) While paying the tuition fees to the Defendant on October 10, 2012, the Plaintiff LAC stated that “it was scheduled to deduct KRW 1,340,000 in the current month, but it was planned to deduct KRW 1,00,000 in the previous month, and KRW 1,000,000 in the previous October and KRW 1,340,000 in the remainder 3,400,000 in the previous 10 months, and was scheduled to deduct KRW 2,00,000 in the previous 15,000 in the previous 3,340,000 in the previous 3,00,000 in the previous 13, 4)” in the e-mail that the Plaintiff B sent to the Defendant on February 13, 2013.