beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 47,00,000 as well as 25% per annum from May 1, 2014 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff asserts that, on February 20, 2014, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 50,000 to the Defendant 3% of the agreed interest per month and the due date set on April 30, 2014, while the Defendant did not borrow money from the Plaintiff and merely borrowed money from the Defendant’s account.
2. Determination
A. According to the evidence No. 1 of the borrower Gap, it is recognized that the plaintiff remitted 50,000,000 won to the account under the name of the defendant on February 20, 2014. The key issue of this case is whether the plaintiff lent the above money to the defendant or whether the account of the defendant was stolen.
In full view of the following circumstances, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 to 3, Gap evidence 2-1 to 3, Gap evidence 3, 5, and 6's testimony, and the overall purport of arguments, the following circumstances, namely, ① the account transfer of 50,000,000 won from the plaintiff's witness Eul's testimony, is the fund management account of the business chain E operated by the defendant with the defendant's wife; ② the account was deposited from the defendant's F's account under the defendant's F's father's name to the plaintiff's interest name on April 18, 2014; ③ The money transferred from the plaintiff's wife was used as part of the defendant's criminal fine payment as the defendant's criminal penalty payment; ③ the money was used as the defendant's employee's wage of the company operated by the defendant; it is reasonable to view that the defendant transferred the money from the plaintiff's wife to 10,000,00 won by borrowing the money; and
B. In full view of the evidence No. 2-1 and No. 3 of the Interest Agreement, and the purport of the entire pleadings as to witness C’s testimony, the Plaintiff agreed on February 20, 2014 to the Defendant at the time of lending KRW 50,000,000 to the Defendant on February 20, 2014.
However, on April 18, 2014, the Plaintiff considered the provisions of the Interest Limitation Act at the third date for pleading of the instant case, on the premise that the total amount of KRW 3,000,000 paid by the Defendant is appropriated to the principal.