beta
Text
1. Obligations arising out of the loan agreement between the Plaintiff and Defendant Apropha social loan company on April 4, 2014;
Reasons
1. Determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant professional loan company
A. On April 4, 2014, the Plaintiff did not have borrowed KRW 3,000,000 from Defendant professional loan companies.
Nevertheless, the defendant professional loan corporation claims payment by asserting that it lent the above money to the plaintiff, thereby seeking confirmation of the existence of the obligation.
(b) Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act);
2. Determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Industrial Complex Loan Co., Ltd. and LicoP Co., Ltd.
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff claimed payment of each of the above money to the Plaintiff even though the Plaintiff did not have borrowed KRW 300,000,000 from Defendant Busan Heavy Loan Co., Ltd. on June 27, 2014, and KRW 3,000,000 from Defendant Locop on September 4, 2014, the Plaintiff sought confirmation of the absence of each of the above obligations against the Defendants.
B. Determination 1) In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of a pecuniary obligation, if the plaintiff, who is the debtor, claims the first time to deny the fact of the occurrence of the obligation by specifying the debtor's claim, the defendant, the creditor, bears the burden of assertion and burden of proof as to the elements of the legal relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da45259, Mar. 13, 1998). 2) As to the instant case, the plaintiff asserted the absence of a loan obligation of KRW 3,00,000 against the defendants on June 27, 2014, since the plaintiff asserted that there is no loan obligation of KRW 3,00,000 against the defendants, the defendant Busan Loan Co., Ltd., Ltd. should prove the fact of each lending KRW 3,00,000 to the plaintiff on September 4, 2014. The evidence No. 3 cannot be admitted as evidence, and the remaining evidence alone is insufficient to acknowledge each of the above facts.
3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is justified. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is accepted.