beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
The Defendant’s husband, C, and the Plaintiff, who were the Plaintiff’s husband, prepared a cash custody certificate (hereinafter “cash custody certificate of this case”) stating that “I will keep the KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW KRW 3,000 on October 6, 2016. The Defendant, on October 15, 2016, paid the Plaintiff KRW KRW KRW 33,000 to the Plaintiff by November 15, 2016, and if the Defendant fails to implement the certificate, shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 5% interest per annum after the lapse of five years specified in the cash custody certificate of this case (hereinafter “instant agreement”). The fact that the Defendant prepared and executed a written agreement with the Plaintiff that did not conflict between the parties.
The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff the above 33 million won and the above 5% interest per annum from October 21, 2010 to October 21, 2019, the sum of 1,4850,000 won, calculated by the rate of 5% per annum, shall be 47,855,00 won, as the cause of the plaintiff's claim, the defendant shall submit two defenses as follows.
① The Defendant is originally unrelated to the Defendant’s obligation of KRW 33 million on the cash custody certificate of this case. The issue arising between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s father D, the Defendant’s husband’s husband, or the Defendant’s husband, or the Defendant’s coercion prepared the cash custody certificate and the written agreement, and thus, the Defendant is not liable. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the preparation process or coercion as alleged by the Defendant.
② The fact that the Defendant remitted KRW 35 million to the Plaintiff on October 26, 2016 is no dispute between the parties.
This defenses that the Defendant paid the obligation based on the instant cash storage certificate and the written agreement, and the Plaintiff’s husband C admitted the Plaintiff’s spouse E and caused the death of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff is merely a hospital fee and consolation money for the Defendant’s death resulting from confinement, etc. (Seoul High Court Decision 2019No80, Supreme Court Decision 2020Do1285).