대여금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The plaintiff asserted that he was aware of the defendant through the introduction of D, and that he lent a total of KRW 97,520,000 to the defendant as shown in the next loan sight table.
5,00,00 won deposited into D account on November 20, 2006; 15,000 won deposited into D account on December 28, 2006; 3,00,000 won paid directly on January 11, 207; 4,000 won paid to E attorney-at-law 1,620,000 won; 1.3,000 won paid on January 11, 207 to the Plaintiff on January 11, 200, 200, 2000 won paid on January 18, 2007, 200, 3,000 won paid on May 18, 2007, 200 won to the Plaintiff. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 170653, Jan. 18, 200, 2000; Presidential Decree No. 18658, Jul. 16, 2007>
2. Since the act of paying money to another person can be conducted through various causes, such as loans for consumption, investment, and donation, it cannot be readily concluded that there was the unity of the parties to a loan for consumption solely on the basis that the money was granted.
Even if there is no dispute as to the fact that the parties provided and received money, the plaintiff's assertion that the lending was made shall bear the burden of proof against the plaintiff who asserts that the lending was made.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2017Da37324 Decided January 24, 2018, etc.). According to the overall purport of the entry and pleading of evidence Nos. 8, 9, and No. 6, the Plaintiff transferred to D on November 20, 2006, among KRW 15,00,000,000.