beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 35,930,412 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from August 10, 2014 to February 18, 2016, and the following.
Reasons
1. Summary of the parties' arguments
A. The plaintiff asserted 1) around December 2004, the plaintiff acquired a restaurant located in Ansan-si in Gyeonggi-do in total of KRW 49,00,000,00 and operated the restaurant from January 1, 2005. The acquisition amount of KRW 49,00,000 from the defendant to December 31, 2004, borrowed and used the restaurant without interest and payment due agreement until December 31, 2004. 2) The plaintiff thereafter operated the restaurant and collected money from the defendant from February 6, 2005 to March 28, 2006, and completed the payment of the principal amount of KRW 62,358,00 in cash ( KRW 19,960,00) or by account transfer ( KRW 42,498,00,000) and paid KRW 49,00,000 for interest and KRW 1305,305,00 in loan name.
3) Following that, the Defendant agreed to create money from a restaurant operator to the Plaintiff. On May 15, 2009, the Plaintiff leased or consumed 103,120,000 won (i.e., cash account transfer of KRW 41,370,000) to the Defendant until May 15, 2009 (i.e., KRW 61,750,000). However, the Defendant did not return the money received as above. However, according to the Plaintiff’s demand, the Defendant did not refund the money to the Plaintiff, and did not refund the remainder of KRW 93,620,000 (i.e., KRW 103,120,000) (i., KRW 93,620,50,000). Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff damages for delay.
B. Defendant’s assertion 1) On December 2004, the amount that the Defendant lent to the Plaintiff around the above 49,000,000 won to the Plaintiff for the loan necessary for the purchase of restaurant accommodation and the repair of the restaurant, etc., in addition to the above 49,000,000 won, and the loan amounting to KRW 59,00,000 is more, and the interest rate on the loan was set at 20% per annum. 2) The Plaintiff merely repaid the loan by account transfer and paid in cash, and all the amount that the Plaintiff paid by account transfer was appropriated for the repayment of the loan principal and interest.
3. Therefore, the defendant receives the plaintiff's money in addition to the repayment of the loan lent to the plaintiff in relation to the restaurant acceptance.