beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
Judgment of the first instance.
Reasons
1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows, except for the rejection of Gap evidence No. 3-1 and No. 2, which are insufficient to recognize the plaintiff's assertion as evidence submitted by the plaintiff at the trial of the court of the court of the court of the first instance, since it is identical to the part of the defendant among the reasons for the judgment of the court of the first instance, it shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination as to the assertion of addition of the trial room
A. The Plaintiff’s wife, who was the Defendant’s wife, stored in the Defendant’s account the sum of KRW 5855,00 (hereinafter “instant loan, etc.”) that was acquired by deceiving the Plaintiff, and the total amount of KRW 5855,00 (hereinafter “instant loan, etc.”) was evaded compulsory execution. As such, the Plaintiff sought the refund of the instant loan,
In addition, since the debt such as the instant loan, etc. borrowed from the Plaintiff for the purpose of running a marital life, falls under the daily living obligation, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable with the Plaintiff for the instant loan, etc. and its delay damages.
B. Determination 1) A juristic act related to daily home affairs as referred to in Article 832 of the Civil Act refers to a juristic act related to the ordinary affairs required in the community of a couple. The specific scope is determined not only by the social status, property, and revenue capacity of the couple, but also by the custom of the community, which is the place of the living of the couple. However, in determining whether the specific juristic act is a juristic act related to daily home affairs, it shall be determined not only by the internal circumstance of the married couple community or only by the individual purpose of the act, but also by the objective type, character, etc. of the juristic act (see Supreme Court Decision 200Da8267, Apr. 25, 2000). In addition, the amount of money borrowed and the purpose of borrowing is to borrow.