beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff deposited a total of KRW 100,000,000 in each deposit account designated by the Defendant five times as shown below.
On January 31, 2008, 10,000 C on the 40,000,000 C on February 11, 2008, 200 C 3, 200 C on February 16, 2008, 16, 2000 D 40,000 on February 16, 2008, 16, 200,000 D 5 5 on February 16, 2008 [Grounds for Recognition] No dispute is raised, each entry in subparagraphs 1 through 5, and the purport of the whole oral argument.
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) lent a total of KRW 100,000,000 to the Defendant’s account designated by the Defendant. However, as the Defendant did not pay this up to the present day, the Plaintiff primarily sought payment of KRW 100,000,000 for the above loan to the Defendant, and damages for delay thereof. (ii) Even if the Plaintiff’s domestic payment of KRW 100,000 to the Defendant is not a loan but a loan, as alleged below by the Defendant, the Defendant promised to pay KRW 100,000 to the Plaintiff since six months have passed since the Defendant received money from the Plaintiff, and thus, the Defendant first promised to pay KRW 100,000 to the Defendant.
B. The Defendant’s assertion is that the Plaintiff made an investment in the F Development Project (hereinafter “instant Project”) implemented by E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”), and did not lend money to the Defendant, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with.
3. We examine whether the above KRW 100,000,000 paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant was a loan.
In full view of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff lent KRW 100,00,00 to the Defendant, in full view of the evidence Nos. 6 through 18, and evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including each number), as well as the testimony and the purport of the whole pleadings by the witness C of the Party concerned:
① The Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Defendant on charges of fraud around 2017 on the grounds that the Plaintiff had paid KRW 100,000,000 to the Defendant.