beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a partnership agreement with each other, “D” in the 3rd floor of Gwangju Northern-gu, to jointly invest and operate the instant subjected bank (hereinafter “D”), and accordingly, jointly operate the instant subject bank.
B. When the Plaintiff and the Defendant came to difficult to operate the instant bank due to business depression, the Defendant renounced the operation of the instant bank, and the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 40,000,000 to the Defendant.
C. On April 19, 2012, the Defendant prepared a “written rejection of renunciation” and received a notarial deed.
(hereinafter “instant written waiver”). On April 19, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a notarial deed under a monetary loan agreement with the purport that the Defendant lent KRW 40,000,000 to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff repay this up to April 19, 2015.
(No. 579, 2012, hereinafter referred to as the "notarial deeds of this case"). (No. 579, 2012, hereinafter referred to as the "notarial deeds of this case"). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence No. 1, Gap evidence No. 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. After preparing the instant notarial deed, the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) paid KRW 20,000,000 to the Defendant on April 23, 2012; and (b) returned the said money on the same day.
This is because the Plaintiff and the Defendant had re-consulted with regard to the operation of the instant bank, and the Defendant had newly agreed to operate the instant bank.
(However, it is not clear whether the defendant's sole operation, whether the plaintiff and the defendant's joint operation, and the co-operator of the defendant and the non-party E are the plaintiff's assertion. However, the plaintiff, ① given up the operation of the respondent in this case, the plaintiff agreed to operate again, and actually transferred all rights to the defendant (the plaintiff, ② the defendant returned KRW 20,000,000 to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff re-assigns the respondent in this case.