beta
Text
1. Defendant B’s KRW 180,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from January 1, 2015 to April 12, 2016 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the statement in Gap evidence No. 1 as to the claim against Defendant B and the purport of the entire pleadings, it can be acknowledged that the Plaintiff loaned KRW 180,00,000 to Defendant B on December 31, 2014. As such, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 180,000,000 and the amount of KRW 15% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from January 1, 2015 to April 12, 2016, which is the day following the day when the above payment was due, as the Plaintiff seeks from January 1, 2015 to the day when the judgment in this case was rendered, and from the next day to the day when the payment was fully made.
I would like to say.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remainder is without merit.
2. The Plaintiff asserts that the determination of the claim against Defendant C and Defendant D was made on December 31, 2014 and lent KRW 180,000,00 to Defendant C and their children, and Defendant D.
In full view of the overall purport of the statements and arguments as to the evidence Nos. 3-1 and 2-1 and 3-2, the defendant C and the defendant D have prepared and delivered the loan certificate (Evidence No. 2) to the defendant B, which was attached on October 23, 2013, and the defendant B received the loan certificate (Evidence No. 2) from the defendant B, "The money is the loan certificate (Evidence No. 2)" as the loan certificate (Evidence No. 2) that the plaintiff lent 180,000,000 won to the defendant C and the defendant D as evidence, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise, so the plaintiff's claim against the defendant C and the defendant D cannot be accepted.
Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant C and Defendant D is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is justified within the scope of the above recognition. The plaintiff's remaining claim against the defendant B and the claim against the defendant C and the defendant D are dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.