Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above cancellation is dismissed.

Plaintiff’s assertion

On September 4, 2018, the Defendant demanded that the Plaintiff purchase a new vehicle due to its old motor vehicle, and that the Defendant would refund money to the Defendant on October 2018, 2018. The Plaintiff lent the said money to the Defendant by means of remitting KRW 46 million to the Defendant’s account in the name of the Defendant on October 4, 2018.

However, the Defendant, on March 7, 2019, paid part of the above loans amounting to KRW 25 million and did not pay the remainder of the loans. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the loans to the Plaintiff and the delayed damages.

Judgment

In the event of a transfer of money to another person’s deposit account, etc., the payment can be made based on various legal causes, such as consumption lending, loan, donation, change, etc., and thus, there was a mutual agreement between the parties with respect to consumption lending and lending solely on the fact that such transfer had been made.

It cannot be readily concluded (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da30861, Jul. 26, 2012). The burden of proving that the transfer was consistent with such intent is the Plaintiff asserting that the remittance was made for consumption lending and lending (see Supreme Court Decisions 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972; 2014Da26187, Jul. 10, 2014, etc.). The specific determination in the instant case is that the Plaintiff remitted KRW 46 million to the account in the Defendant’s name on Oct. 4, 2018; the Defendant purchased a vehicle with the said money on the same day; the Defendant purchased a vehicle with the said money on Nov. 22, 2018; and the Plaintiff’s return of the vehicle at the request of the Plaintiff on July 29, 2018.

The purport of the Defendant’s reply to the purport that it is “ is making an endeavor,” and the fact that the Defendant remitted KRW 25 million to the account held in the Plaintiff’s name on March 7, 2019 is either a dispute between the parties, or if the purport of the entire pleadings is added to the evidence as set forth in Nos. 3, 4, and 5, and No. 4.