beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 58,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from December 29, 2015 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On July 20, 2012, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 58 million to the Defendant’s account.
B. The plaintiff and the defendant are the parties of interest.
[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy
2. The plaintiff asserts that the above KRW 58 million was lent to the defendant without fixing the due date for repayment, and that the defendant sought the return of the loan. Accordingly, the defendant asserts that the above KRW 58 million was not a loan to the defendant, but an investment or loan to C (hereinafter "C"), and that the plaintiff's claim is groundless.
Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence 1, 6 and Eul evidence 5, the defendant was employed as a representative since its establishment on November 2, 2006 and the plaintiff was employed as an employee in C from the establishment of C to July 2, 2013, and the plaintiff requested the defendant to inform the defendant of the payment plan for unpaid benefits and retirement allowances, 58 million won loans, etc. around October 2013, and the defendant arranged all employees of C on November 19, 2013, and "D" that "the defendant arranged all employees of C, and he opened for the defendant's work with his intention to perform the store and pay the amount of three million to five million won each month in the amount of money."
The following circumstances revealed as above, that is, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 58 million to the account under the name of the Defendant’s individual; that is, the Plaintiff and the Defendant were in the relationship of interest and transferred to the account under the name of the Defendant; that is, the Plaintiff appears to have not received a separate loan from the Defendant; and that the Plaintiff was an officer of C.
In light of the fact that there is no evidence to see that the plaintiff operated C as the defendant or as the partnership business, and the defendant expressed his intention to pay the above 58 million won in cash individually, it is deemed that the plaintiff lent 58 million won to the defendant.
Meanwhile, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff’s statement of evidence Nos. 7, 8, 1, 2, and 3 as to the statement of evidence Nos. 7, 8, 1, 2, and 3, as a whole, is as follows: