beta
Text
1. Defendant B’s KRW 4,998,858 as well as 5% per annum from July 31, 2015 to August 31, 2017, respectively, to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The fact that the plaintiff lent the sum of KRW 1,240,000,000 to the defendant B three times as follows is not in dispute between the parties or may be recognized by each description of the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number) (including each number).
According to the above facts of recognition 1,240,000, non-loan 1 2005-07-27 500,000 2002 2005-08-01 500,000 32008-03-28 240,000,000 to the deposit account in the name of Defendant D, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the above loan 1,240,000,000 and interest or delay damages thereon.
The plaintiff asserts that the defendant Eul borrowed KRW 1,240,00,000 as the business fund of the defendant Eul, and therefore the defendant Eul is jointly and severally liable with the defendant Eul. However, the plaintiff cannot be deemed to have lent the above money to the defendant Eul only on such ground, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion against the defendant Eul is without merit.
Since Defendant D received 240,000,000 won directly from the Plaintiff, it is alleged that Defendant D had a duty to repay the above money jointly with Defendant B and C, the case is examined, and the Plaintiff transferred 240,000,000 won to Defendant D’s account in the name of Defendant D as seen earlier. However, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff lent money to Defendant D solely on such ground, and there is no other evidence to support this, the Plaintiff’s above assertion against Defendant D is without merit.
2. Determination as to Defendant B’s assertion
A. According to the overall purport of each of the statements and arguments and evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 (where several numbers exist, including each number) by Defendant B asserted that Defendant B paid all the above loans to the Plaintiff, Defendant B may recognize the fact that Defendant B paid each of the money indicated in the “amount of repayment” as of the date indicated in the “date of performance” column of the attached Table of Appropriation for Performance to the Plaintiff.
However, the relation between the Defendants;