beta
Text
1. The judgment of the first instance court, including the plaintiff's claim extended at the trial room, shall be modified as follows:
The defendant.
Reasons
1. The fact that the Plaintiff lent KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant on June 26, 2015, which determined the cause of the claim, is no dispute between the parties.
Therefore, from May 23, 2016, the day following the delivery date of the complaint of this case to the Plaintiff, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from May 23, 2016 to November 9, 2016, which is the date when the judgment of the competent court is rendered, to the effect that the Defendant claims against the existence and scope of the obligation, and the damages for delay calculated by 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from November 10, 2016 to the date when the obligation is fully paid.
(A) The Plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of interest or delay damages from June 26, 2015, which was the date of lease. There is no evidence to support that there was an interest agreement or the period of repayment was determined. Therefore, the Defendant is liable for delay from the date following the date on which the claim for performance was filed. Accordingly, the Defendant’s defense is rejected on June 2, 201.
A. On September 9, 2015, the Defendant transferred KRW 10,000,00 to C’s account, the Plaintiff’s son on September 9, 2015, and fully repaid the loan.
B. (1) The fact that the Defendant remitted KRW 10,000,000 to C’s account, the Plaintiff’s son on September 9, 2015, does not conflict between the parties.
With respect to the above money, the plaintiff asserts that the business that the plaintiff lent the defendant's name to the plaintiff, and that it is not a repayment of the loan, even if D has delivered the profit that D deposited to the plaintiff.
(2) The following circumstances revealed by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in each statement in evidence Nos. 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, and 2, the Plaintiff’s name to invest KRW 110,000,000 in the business related to the operation of the casino operated by D in the name of the Defendant, and deposited KRW 110,00,000 in the account of D on September 3, 2015, and ② D deposits KRW 110,000,000 in the account of D on September 3, 2015.