대여금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as a whole, it is recognized that the Plaintiff loaned to the Defendant the sum of KRW 15 million on Nov. 12, 2004, and KRW 15 million on Nov. 30, 2004 without the due date. The Defendant remitted to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 550,000,000,000 to the sum of KRW 5550,000,000 from February 23, 2005 to September 7, 2005.
However, the extinctive prescription of the above loan claim is ten years, and the plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case on August 28, 2017, which was ten years after the payment of interest on the above loan was made by the defendant, and ten years passed since September 7, 2005.
The Plaintiff’s loan claims against the Defendant were extinguished by prescription.
It is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant’s partial statement of the evidence No. 4 was suspended by approving the Defendant’s obligation to repay the loan to the Plaintiff on or around May 6, 2014, which was prior to the expiration of the extinctive prescription period, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.