beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay 83,700,000 won to the plaintiff and 15% per annum from May 31, 2018 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. After the divorce in 2017, the Plaintiff was raising one of two married children (204 birth), and the Plaintiff’s global income amount in 2016 is 14,807,215 won.
B. From February 6, 2017 to June 3, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 83,700,000 (hereinafter “the instant money”) to D and E’s account at the Defendant’s request, which operated C, as follows:
Evidence of the temporary recipient of the amount of money (C) KRW 8,00,000 on February 6, 2017, 1201; KRW 7,000,000 on February 6, 2017; KRW 3,200 on March 2, 2017; KRW 1,700,000 on April 17, 2017; KRW 5,000 on April 19, 2017; KRW 60,000 on April 24, 2017; KRW 0,000,000 on KRW 0,00 on May 29, 200, KRW 00; KRW 10,000 on KRW 10,00 on May 15, 2017; KRW 10,000 on KRW 10,5,000 on May 15, 2017; and
C. On May 29, 2017, the Plaintiff received KRW 20,000,000 for insurance refunds from F Co., Ltd. and paid KRW 5,000,000 to the Defendant on the same day (No. 7) and June 1, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 15,000,000 to the Defendant (No. 8). On June 9, 2017, the Plaintiff received KRW 14,99,100 for insurance refunds from F Co., Ltd. and used them for living expenses, etc.
After paying the instant money to the Defendant, the Plaintiff cancelled the insurance contract of the FF Company on January 18, 2018 and was paid KRW 10,477,498.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. 1) The plaintiff's assertion 1) The plaintiff's argument that the plaintiff lent the money of this case to the defendant, so the defendant must return the above money to the plaintiff. 2) The defendant's argument that the money of this case is not a loan, but a donation that the plaintiff voluntarily assisted the defendant
B. In full view of the following circumstances, the Plaintiff’s time to return the instant money to the Defendant, taking into account the facts of the recognition 1, as well as the descriptions of Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 and 6, and the purport of the entire pleadings.