beta
Text
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The defendant is the plaintiff's Dong-ro, the plaintiff's wife and the plaintiff's joint plaintiff B.
B. Upon receipt of a request from the Defendant to lend KRW 175 million from the Defendant, on August 24, 2016, the Plaintiff obtained a loan of KRW 175 million from the Good Price Loan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Good Price Loan”), a savings bank organized by the Defendant, and granted KRW 630,000 in cash to the Defendant on the same day ( KRW 3.5 million for the short-term loan necessary for the above loan and KRW 3.13 million). On the other hand, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 50 million to the Defendant’s account and KRW 120,000 won for the same day.
C. The Plaintiff’s interest on a high-quality loan is KRW 2.1 million on November 12, 2016; KRW 2.1 million on December 23, 2016; KRW 2.1 million on January 23, 2017; and KRW 2.1 million on January 23, 2017; and
2. A total of KRW 7.6 million, including KRW 14.6 million, was paid to the Plaintiff on the other hand, and the Defendant remitted KRW 500,000 to the Plaintiff as the payment of the above interest.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 6 evidence, Eul 2 to 4 evidence (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the facts acknowledged prior to the determination of the Plaintiff’s cause of claim, the Plaintiff, by way of remitting the amount of KRW 170 million out of KRW 175 million from a high-quality cost-based loan to the Defendant’s account, separately lent KRW 6.3 million to the Defendant in cash, and thereafter, paid a total of KRW 7.7 million to the Defendant at least four times as the loan interest, and received KRW 500,000 from the Defendant.
As seen earlier, the circumstance that the Defendant remitted 50,000 won to the Plaintiff for the payment of interest on the Plaintiff’s good-quality loan, and as acknowledged by the evidence Nos. 3 and 4-1 of the evidence No. 4, the Defendant was aware that the Defendant was aware that the Plaintiff received real estate security from a good-quality loan, and that the Defendant lent money to itself on November 21, 2016.