beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. On December 27, 2013, the Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant loaned KRW 2,30,000,000 to the Plaintiff, including KRW 5 million on January 15, 2014, KRW 3.8 million on January 29, 2014, KRW 2.5 million on March 19, 2014, KRW 2.3 million (hereinafter “the instant loan”). In relation to the payment order issued by the Incheon District Court (hereinafter “instant payment order”), the Plaintiff’s claims arising from the instant loan were extinguished by the Plaintiff’s repayment or set-off (the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant or his spouse D as the automatic claim for refund of money) and the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant is confirmed as non-existence of the obligation due to the instant loan.
The suit for confirmation is permissible when there is a danger in existing legal status or rights of the plaintiff, etc. and obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to resolve the dispute. In regard to the payment order of this case, seeking the denial of compulsory execution by itself is more dispute.
Fundamentally, it is a direct means to resolve effectively and effectively.
Therefore, the lawsuit of this case merely seeking confirmation of the non-existence of the debt due to the loan of this case cannot be viewed as a benefit of confirmation.
Therefore, the instant lawsuit is unlawful.
[Ba] Even if we examine, ① the sum of KRW 3,91,00,000,000,000, which the Plaintiff transferred to the Defendant from October 29, 2013 to June 7, 2014, to the Defendant, is KRW 5,765,00,000 (i.e., the sum of KRW 7,99,000,000 - KRW 22,30,000,000,000) of the Defendant’s claims against the Plaintiff before the instant loan, including that written in the evidence No. 6, submitted by the Plaintiff (i.e., the sum of KRW 7,99,00). The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is difficult to view the instant loan as a transaction between the Plaintiff and D, as alleged by the Plaintiff.