beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence No. 2-2 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff may recognize the fact that the plaintiff lent KRW 50 million to the defendant around September 25, 1998 (hereinafter "the loan claim of this case"). Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff the principal and interest of the loan claim of this case.
2. Judgment on the defendant's defense of extinctive prescription
A. The Defendant asserted that the instant loan claim had expired due to the expiration of the extinctive prescription, and thus, the Defendant’s payment of interest on the instant loan claim to the Plaintiff on February 26, 199 can be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings as stated in the evidence No. 1. As such, the extinctive prescription of the instant loan claim ought to run from this point of time, and it is apparent that the instant lawsuit was filed on March 10, 2014, where ten years have passed since the instant loan claim had been extinguished due to the lapse of the extinctive prescription, and thus, the Defendant’s defense was well-grounded.
B. On May 4, 2009, the Plaintiff resisted to the effect that the Defendant renounced the benefit of extinctive prescription by remitting the interest on the instant loan claim amounting to KRW 500,000 (hereinafter “the instant money”).
[A] The Defendant acquired shares in co-ownership under C’s name and jointly owned by the Plaintiff, etc., and owned with the Plaintiff, etc., as the forest land in Yangyang-gun D.
(1) The Defendant, on May 4, 2009, delivered the instant money to the Plaintiff on May 4, 2009, does not have any dispute between the parties.
However, on February 26, 199, the Defendant failed to pay interest on the instant loan claims for more than 10 years after the last payment, and even if the extinctive prescription has expired, the Defendant first contacted the Plaintiff on May 4, 2009 and gave the instant loan.