beta
Text
1. Defendant B’s KRW 110,990,00 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from January 13, 2017 to December 20, 2018.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments as to Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the plaintiff may recognize the fact that the plaintiff loaned the money corresponding to the money stated in the "Date" column in the attached Table No. 1 to defendant Eul as the introduction of defendant C and lent a total of KRW 242,550,000 from December 22, 2014 to June 12, 2015. The fact that the plaintiff received reimbursement of KRW 131,560,000 from the defendant Eul among them is recognized by the plaintiff himself.
2. As to the claim for damages arising from a tort, the Plaintiff did not have the ability to repay even if Defendant B borrowed money, and the Defendants, by deceiving the Plaintiff, committed an illegal act of having the Plaintiff lend the money to Defendant B like the above recognized facts. The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff is liable to pay the Plaintiff a loan of KRW 10,990,00 (242,550,500-131,560,000) with compensation for damages arising from the joint tort as above, and damages for delay.
However, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the Defendants deceptiond the Plaintiff in relation to the Plaintiff’s ability to repay, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this, and the Plaintiff’s above assertion based on this premise is rejected.
3. The Defendant B’s obligation to repay the loan: Provided, That the Plaintiff’s assertion can be seen as including the purport of seeking the repayment of the loan in arrears against the Defendant B.
Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 110,990,00 ( KRW 242,550,000-131,560,00).
In this regard, Defendant B asserted that the present outstanding loan does not reach the above KRW 110,990,000, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this.
Meanwhile, there is no argument or evidence by the Plaintiff as to the fact that the Plaintiff agreed to the repayment period or interest at the time of lending money to Defendant B, and the Defendant B is a duplicate of the instant complaint.