beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. In the case of receiving the Plaintiff’s alleged pigs, there is a case of depositing the down payment of a kind of pigs at the request of the Plaintiff’s farm owner. On January 16, 2006, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 50,000,000 from the account in the name of E used by the individual D among pigs at the request of the Defendants, and deposited KRW 110,910,000 in the account under the name of E.
D paid 160,768,000 won to the Defendants, which was calculated by deducting the fee for the same day.
Afterwards, the Defendants demanded that the Plaintiff pay KRW 50,000,000 to the Plaintiff for the payment of the payment of the payment of the payment of the payment of the payment of the payment of the payment of the payment of the payment of the payment of the payment of the payment of the payment for the payment of KRW 50,00,000 on May 26, 2010.
Since the relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendants was terminated, the Defendants should jointly pay to the Plaintiff advance payment of KRW 100,000,000 and delay damages.
2. Determination
A. The fact that the Plaintiff paid KRW 50,000,000 to the account in the name of E is recognized as having been paid to the Defendant, which was determined on January 17, 2006 by the Plaintiff as to KRW 50,00,000.
However, the following circumstances, which can be recognized by the health stand, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 9, and the overall purport of testimony and pleading by witnesses D as to the title thereof, i.e., (i) the plaintiff has already paid KRW 150,00,000 as a security deposit around September 2005, and (ii) the plaintiff had continued to engage in continuous transactions with the defendant since 2005. The plaintiff paid KRW 174,207,00 to the defendant, and KRW 28,596,00 as a result of November 28, 2005, although it appears that the plaintiff did not pay the price for pigs from December 15, 2005 to December 15, 2006; and (iii) the deposit money has been paid again for 4 months only as a security deposit, and thus, the plaintiff has to bear an indication of such deposit as at the time of payment.