beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff's assertion
A. Defendant B, on December 17, 2013, lent KRW 30,000,000 to the Plaintiff on December 17, 2013, only two months shall be paid.
Defendant C said that it would guarantee Defendant B’s above loan obligation, and the Plaintiff remitted KRW 30,000,000 to Defendant B. B. The Defendants, on December 31, 2013, lent to the Plaintiff the remainder of the apartment house that Defendant C agreed to purchase, with KRW 10,00,000,000.
The Plaintiff wired KRW 10,00,000 to Defendant C and lent it. (c) The Defendants provided that “20,000,000 won shall be repaid to the Plaintiff on March 19, 2014,” and the Plaintiff remitted KRW 20,000 to Defendant B.
Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 60,000,000 and damages for delay.
2. As alleged by the Plaintiff, the facts that the Defendants received a total of KRW 60,00,000 from the Plaintiff three times are either a dispute between the parties, or that the Defendants obtained a total of KRW 60,00 from the Plaintiff, by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 1, 4-3, 1, 3, 6, 7, and 9.
However, even though there is no dispute as to the fact that there was a receipt of money between the parties, when the plaintiff becomes a loan for consumption, and when the defendant contests the cause of the receipt of money, the plaintiff is responsible for proving that it was received as a loan for consumption (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972); the records in subparagraphs 2 through 5; the court's order to submit financial transaction information to the IBK Bank Co., Ltd.; and witness D's testimony alone, it is insufficient to recognize the plaintiff's assertion that Defendant B borrowed 60,000,000 won from the plaintiff and jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan; and there is no other evidence to prove this.
Rather, the evidence mentioned above is written in No. 10.