대여금
1. The Defendant shall jointly and severally with D to the Plaintiff KRW 90,000,000 as well as the period from August 12, 2017 to September 6, 2018.
The main argument of the plaintiff's argument is that the defendant and D are married couple, and the mother and father of the defendant are working as the representative director, and the defendant is required to obtain a loan for the construction cost of new factories of E company located in Macheon-si, in which the defendant is working as an inside director, and requested a lending of money.
Accordingly, on April 24, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) deposited KRW 50 million into D’s account by ordering the Defendant and D to lend KRW 50 million to the Defendant; (b) drafted a loan certificate with D as of May 2, 2017 (Evidence 1-1); (c) lent KRW 20 million in cash to the Defendant and D on June 24, 2017; (d) drafted a loan certificate with D as of June 26, 2017 (Evidence 1-2); (c) written KRW 500,000 to lend KRW 20,000 to the Defendant and D on July 12, 2017; and (e) written the loan certificate as of June 26, 2017 (Evidence 1-2); (e) deposited KRW 170,000 in cash with the Defendant and D on July 12, 2017; and (e) deposited KRW 501,7137,7000,000.7.
(2) The Defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay the total amount of the above loan amounting to KRW 90 million and damages for delay.
Preliminary assertion, if the Plaintiff’s delivery of KRW 90 million to the Defendant and D, as alleged by the Defendant, is called an investment amount, the Defendant and D did not proceed with the investment-related business, and thus the Defendant and D cancel or terminate the investment agreement and seek the return of the investment amount. If the said KRW 90 million is not a loan or an investment amount, the Plaintiff would have paid KRW 90 million to the Defendant and D without any legal cause, and thus, the Plaintiff seek the return of the said amount as unjust enrichment.
The plaintiff of the defendant's assertion is the first time in Korea.