beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion
A. On March 2015, the Defendant claimed that the Plaintiff lend KRW 90,000,000,000 to the Plaintiff on the pretext of the need for a prompt business fund, as a condition of 1 year and 20% interest per annum.
Accordingly, on March 2, 2015, the Plaintiff concluded a verbal contract with the Defendant and lent KRW 90 million to the Defendant.
However, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the loan amount of KRW 90 million and damages for delay, as the principal is not returned without paying interest from March 2016, even though the term of loan was expired.
B. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement No. 1, the Plaintiff’s remittance of KRW 90 million to the account under the name of the Defendant, a business chain Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the amount of remittance of this case”) on March 2, 2015, is recognized.
However, when the Defendant contests the Plaintiff’s assertion that there was no dispute as to the fact that money was available between the parties, the Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the money was lent to the Plaintiff (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da73179, Sept. 15, 2015). The Plaintiff asserts that the amount of remittance in this case is a loan, and the Plaintiff asserts that the amount of remittance in this case is only an investment that the Defendant did not borrow it and that the amount of money was invested to the Defendant or E that was introduced by the Defendant. Therefore, the Plaintiff is liable to prove that the amount of remittance in this case is a loan.
In other words, the following facts and circumstances, which are acknowledged by adding up the whole purport of the pleadings in each of the statements Nos. 1 through 6, and No. 8, have not been prepared as of March 2, 2015, for which the Plaintiff asserted that he lent money to the Defendant, or as of March 2, 2015, to recognize or defer the obligation of return of the Defendant, and the Plaintiff is particular.