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. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant had an in-depth relationship from spring in 2011 to summer.
B. On November 17, 201, the Plaintiff paid KRW 35 million to the Defendant respectively, KRW 5 million on December 19, 201, KRW 140 million on June 14, 201, and KRW 1.4 million on June 14, 201.
C. The Defendant used KRW 35 million, which was paid from the Plaintiff on November 17, 201, for the purchase price of the electric source site located in the Busan-gun, Busan-gun, for the purchase price for the electric source site for the electric source site located in the Nam-gu, Ulsan-gu (hereinafter “instant apartment”). The Defendant used KRW 55 million, which was paid on December 19, 201, as part of the sale price for the apartment, and used KRW 50 million, which was paid on June 14, 2012, for the purchase price for the electric source site located in the Busan-gun, Busan-gun.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff leased KRW 140 million to the Defendant as the purchase fund for the instant apartment and electric source housing site. As such, the Plaintiff sought the above loan and its delay damages against the Defendant.
B. The Defendant alleged that he had an internal relationship with the Plaintiff since early 2011, but the Defendant, which the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant, donated to the Defendant for the purpose of inducing the Plaintiff to go home and forming a house for living. As such, the Defendant did not have an obligation to return it to the Plaintiff.
In addition, the above money is given in accordance with the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant who had an internal relationship to resolve the marriage with their spouse and to live together. This constitutes illegal consideration in violation of good morals and other social order, and thus, the plaintiff cannot seek the return thereof to the defendant.
3. Determination
A. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by integrating the respective descriptions and images of Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 5, i.e., the Plaintiff’s earned income in 2010 53,250,000, 45,384,000, and earned income in 201 48,000,000.