beta
Text
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. On November 30, 2010, the Plaintiff rendered a loan of KRW 6,500,000 on December 30, 2010 to Defendant B with the maturity of payment as of December 30, 2010, and the fact that Defendant C provided a joint and several guarantee for the above loan obligation does not conflict between the parties.
(2) The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the loan amounting to KRW 6,500,000 and the delay damages, barring any other circumstance.
2. Determination as to the defendants' defense of repayment
A. The fact that Defendant B paid the Plaintiff KRW 6,50,000,000 on December 28, 201, and KRW 200,000 on February 28, 201, and KRW 6,50,000 on April 13, 201 does not conflict between the parties.
B. As to this, the Defendants asserted that Defendant B borrowed the instant loan from the Plaintiff as the need for attorney fees, and that the Plaintiff paid KRW 6,500,000 to the Plaintiff as above, while the Plaintiff claimed that: (a) on April 13, 2011, the Plaintiff did not pay for the instant loan; (b) requested Defendant B to borrow money for reasons that there is a need for a criminal litigation-related attorney fees separately from the instant loan; and (c) the Plaintiff borrowed money from Defendant B to pay KRW 6,00,000 for the additional loan; and (d) the remainder of KRW 50,000 for the instant loan was not paid as the repayment for the instant loan.
C. Considering the following facts and circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the above KRW 6,500,00 paid to the Plaintiff by Defendant B was paid as the repayment of the instant loan, taking into account the following facts and circumstances that can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions of No. 2, No. 2, No. 3, and No. 4 as well as the overall purport of pleadings.
First, as to whether the Plaintiff extended KRW 6,00,000 to Defendant B in addition to the instant loan, it is insufficient to recognize it only by the health department and D’s factual confirmation (Evidence A2).