beta
Text
1. Defendant C’s KRW 33,00,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from April 2, 2016 to July 12, 2016.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that the Defendants jointly and severally are liable to repay KRW 53 million to the Plaintiff for the following reasons.
① Upon receiving a request from Defendant B to lend money to operate a money exchange center in the adult amusement room, the Plaintiff lent KRW 95 million to Defendant B’s account from November 14, 2015 to December 26, 2005, including: (a) transferring KRW 40 million to Defendant B’s account; and (b) delivering KRW 55 million in check.
② After that, around July 2007, Defendant B reduced or exempted the loan amount of KRW 60 million, taking into account the economic situation of Defendant B.
③ On July 13, 2010, Defendant C drafted a letter to the effect that the said loan will be repaid instead of the said loan.
④ On August 11, 2010, the Plaintiff received KRW 2 million, KRW 3 million on November 29, 201, and KRW 7 million on December 27, 2011 from the Defendant C’s account to the Plaintiff’s account.
⑤ Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 53 million (=60 million - 7 million) and damages for delay.
B. Defendant B’s assertion 1) did not request the Plaintiff to lend money, and Defendant C, her husband, was aware that he/she was using money from the Plaintiff via Defendant B’s account, and thus cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim. Defendant C cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim due to the following reasons.
① Defendant C received KRW 40 million from the Plaintiff to Defendant B’s account as the investment title of the money exchange business. Of them, Defendant C repaid KRW 7 million to the Plaintiff. Defendant B is merely a simple account holder, and is irrelevant to the instant investment, etc.
② The Plaintiff may not seek a return of illegal consideration that invested in an exchange facility in an illegal entertainment room.
③ In the instant lawsuit, five years have passed since December 26, 2005, when Defendant C finally received money from the Plaintiff.