대여금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The fact that the Plaintiff remitted KRW 52,00,000 to the account under the name of the Defendant on April 5, 2011 does not conflict between the parties, or may be recognized by the statement in the evidence A No. 1.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff asserts that he lent the above KRW 52,00,000 to the defendant. Accordingly, the defendant asserts that he received the above money while he used the account under the name of the defendant, and that he was unrelated to the above money.
B. Even if there is no dispute as to the fact that the plaintiff received money between the parties to the judgment, the reason that the plaintiff received it is a loan for consumption, and the defendant is liable to prove that it was received due to a loan for consumption if it is disputed.
In light of the records of evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972). In light of the records of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff lent the above KRW 52,00,000 to the Defendant solely with the statement of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this, the Plaintiff’s above assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.