beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
The plaintiff's assertion on the cause of the claim has lent 10,000,000 won to the defendant over three times in 190.
The Defendant agreed with the Plaintiff to partially repay the above amount on August 2015, and paid KRW 1,000,000 from August 2015 to October 2016, but did not pay the remainder of KRW 9,00,000.
Ultimately, the Plaintiff had a loan claim amounting to KRW 10,000,000 against the Defendant, and the Defendant renounced the above loan claim’s expiration interest by paying KRW 1,00,000,000 among them, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the remainder of the loan claim amounting to KRW 9,00,000 and delay damages.
Judgment
The health account of whether the Plaintiff lent money to the Defendant, there are the descriptions of the evidence No. 1 and the images of the evidence No. 3, as shown in the Plaintiff’s assertion.
However, in light of each of the above evidence, the defendant's assertion that "the case of this debt is known to Emama in the beginning of the 90 year, and the amount repaid in 100,000 won thereafter was deposited in the name of E, not the defendant, mainly in the name of C. The above evidence alone is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff lent KRW 10,000,000 to the defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.
(C) The Defendant, who is not the spouse of the Defendant, is not only hard to recognize that the Defendant borrowed money from the Plaintiff, but also does not specify the amount of the loan). Furthermore, even if the Defendant borrowed money from the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant lent money to the Defendant at the beginning of 1990. Thus, even according to the Plaintiff’s assertion, it is evident that the instant lawsuit was brought after the expiration of the
The assertion of extinctive prescription can be judged by the person who intends to enjoy the benefit as a defense in principle, but in civil procedure.