beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
Reasons
1. The fact that: (a) on September 19, 2016, the amount of the date of recognition (original) is 3,000,000,000 on September 20, 2016, September 10, 2016, 200,000 on September 23, 2016; (b) on November 22, 2016, 200,000 on November 10, 200,000 on November 23, 2016; (c) there is no dispute between the parties concerned or may be recognized by each of the parties concerned with the sum of KRW 63 million on September 10, 200,00 on November 24, 2016, with the Plaintiff’s list as follows; and (d) there is no dispute between the parties concerned or the amount of KRW 63 million on September 25, 2016.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff alleged that he lent the instant money to the defendant, and the defendant asserted that the said money was donated to the plaintiff who had been in a relationship of interest at the time.
B. Determination 1) Even if there is no dispute as to the fact that a party gave and received money, when the Defendant contests the Plaintiff’s assertion that the lending was made, the Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the lending was made (see Supreme Court Decision 2017Da37324, Jan. 24, 2018). Meanwhile, it cannot be readily concluded that the cause of giving and receiving money is a gift immediately on the ground that the two parties are between men and women having a relationship with one another. Determination as to whether the cause of lending is a gift ought to be made by taking into account the details and purpose of giving and receiving the money, the source, amount, and intention of return
In other words, if the amount of the delivered money does not take a large portion in the property or remuneration of the payer, and the principal has paid it in response to the request of the other party in a situation where the money is insufficient, or the other party has paid the money purely for his own personal purpose regardless of community life and has promised to repay the money received later, it can be deemed that the other party has paid the money on the premise that the other party bears a legally binding obligation to repay the money.