beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 25,00,000 as well as annual 5% from December 26, 2016 to August 25, 2017 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 1 through 3 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff lent KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant on January 7, 2014 with the due date set on July 7, 2014 (hereinafter “instant loan”). Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a loan of KRW 30,000,000 and damages for delay.
2. Judgment on the defendant's defense
A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Plaintiff in addition to the amount that the Plaintiff directly transferred or withdrawn the payment passbook to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff paid out the total amount of KRW 10,000.
According to the statement in Eul evidence No. 1, 100,00 won on January 10, 2014, 900,000 won on February 14, 2014, and 3,000,000 won on March 3, 2014, and 5,000,000 won on August 222, 2014, respectively, may be acknowledged. However, the statement in Eul evidence No. 1 alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the defendant directly transferred or withdrawn the payment to the plaintiff by issuing the payment passbook check card to the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
Therefore, the part of the defendant's above defense that paid a total of KRW 10,000,000 is just.
B. As to this, the Plaintiff received KRW 900,000 as of February 14, 2014, and deposited KRW 3,000,000 on March 3, 2014, and received KRW 8,000,000 as of March 3, 2014 from the Defendant’s deposit, and received KRW 5,00,000 on the same day, respectively.
The statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 are insufficient to acknowledge that the plaintiff agreed on the interest rate of 3% per month while making the loan of this case to the defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the plaintiff's defense against this part is rejected.
Meanwhile, according to the purport of Gap evidence No. 4 and the whole pleadings, the defendant deposited KRW 3,00,000 to the plaintiff on March 3, 2014, and thereafter the amount of goods separate from the loan of this case 8,000.