beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 as well as 30% per annum from March 18, 2010 to the day of full payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On March 18, 2010, the Defendant prepared a loan certificate with the content that the principal was borrowed on March 18, 201 as of March 18, 201 (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”). On May 7, 2010, the Defendant certified the loan certificate of this case at the notary public C office of the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office as the copy No. 5784, a copy of the loan certificate of this case to D, which was issued on May 7, 2010.
B. On August 23, 2012, D transferred the claim against the Defendant to the Plaintiff, who is the wife of D, with the foregoing claim against the Defendant. On February 13, 2015, D notified the Defendant of the assignment of the above claim, and on February 16, 2015, the above notification was served on the Defendant.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1-8 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff's assertion 1) At the time of preparing the plaintiff's argument, the defendant repaid KRW 100 million to D until the loan was made, and the defendant again borrowed KRW 100 million and deposited KRW 100 million to E's account under the name of the defendant and received the above loan certificate. As stated in the loan certificate of this case, D has a claim to return a loan of KRW 100 million to the defendant and the plaintiff acquired the above claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the amount of KRW 100 million and the interest or delay damages to the plaintiff. 2) The defendant's argument demanded D to lend the loan to D, and the defendant received only a copy of the certificate of this case, and did not borrow KRW 100 million from D.
D The remittance of KRW 100 million to E is merely a remittance of KRW 100 million out of the Defendant’s obligation to pay KRW 200 million to E through D, and is not a borrowing of KRW 100 million from D.
B. We examine the judgment, and examine the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence No. 23-25, from March 18, 2010 to D’s East G account from Defendant B’s wife F account.