beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was unable to refund KRW 11,979,065 as of January 22, 2016, by lending money to the Defendant for the purpose of establishing a hospital, and was unable to refund KRW 8,000,000 on April 5, 2016, which was after the establishment of a hospital.
Accordingly, on July 13, 2018, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant to pay the above loans and delay damages. On September 5, 2018, the Defendant’s representative C sent by the Plaintiff on September 5, 2018, stating that “I confirm the above amount. I simultaneously pay the loans at the same time,” and “D Hospital E” and “C” and affixed the corporate seal and C’s seal.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the unpaid loan 22,805,320 won and interest for delay.
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. Legal doctrine is established when one of the parties agrees to transfer the ownership of money or other substitutes to the other party, and the other party agrees to return such ownership in the same kind, quality, and quantity. As such, there must be an agreement between the parties as to the above point (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da41263, 41270, Nov. 11, 2010). The burden of proving the conclusion of a monetary loan contract in a lawsuit claiming a return of loan is the Plaintiff who asserts its effect.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da12280, Jun. 14, 2013). In a case where a person transfers money to another person’s deposit account, etc., the remittance may be based on various legal causes, such as loan for consumption, donation, and repayment. Therefore, it cannot be readily concluded that a party to a loan for consumption had the intent to agree with a loan for consumption solely on the fact that such remittance was made (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da30861, Jul. 26, 2012). The burden of proving that such an intent has been jointly carried out.