beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the claim
A. On February 9, 2004, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff transferred KRW 75 million to Defendant C and lent it to Defendant B (hereinafter “B”) or Defendant C. Around November 4, 2004, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 5 million to Defendant B or Defendant C, and sought payment of KRW 5,500,000,000,000 which was not paid to Defendant B or Defendant C. (2) The Defendant alleged that the Plaintiff was paid KRW 75,00,000 from the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff was paid KRW 75,00,000 from Defendant C, which was paid to the Plaintiff as the promoters of Defendant B, and this was not a loan by Defendant B or Defendant C from the Plaintiff.
② Although Defendant B received KRW 5 million from the Plaintiff, it is only the amount borne by the Plaintiff, which is a shareholder, due to the need for the operation funds of Defendant B, and not leased by Defendant B or Defendant C.
③ Even if each of the above money was lent for household affairs, the plaintiff’s claim was extinguished by the ten-year extinctive prescription.
3) According to Gap evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, and 4, the plaintiff transferred KRW 75 million to defendant C on February 9, 2004, around November 4, 2004, KRW 5 million to defendant B, and the defendant B paid KRW 7 million to the head of the Tong in the name of the plaintiff's denial, KRW 3.5 million for three months on the last four months, and KRW 3.5 million on the last four months, although it is recognized that each statement of Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 11 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) is known through the whole purport of the oral argument. In other words, the plaintiff's shares are allocated as a shareholder of defendant B established on February 11, 2004, Eul operated by the plaintiff, and Eul transferred shares to the defendant Eul for a considerable period of time after the plaintiff transferred the shares to the above defendant Eul for a considerable period of time after the plaintiff was transferred to each of the above defendant Eul.