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 entries in evidence A2 and the purport of the entire pleadings in witness C and D’s testimony, the fact that the Plaintiff, via D, remitted KRW 45,300,000,000 to the Defendant, including KRW 2 million around March 3, 2012, KRW 300,000 around April 23, 2012, KRW 5 million around May 15, 2012, KRW 3 million around April 9, 2012, and KRW 35,00,000 via the Korean Peninsula Construction Corporation through D Co., Ltd.
2. The gist of the party’s assertion was the cause of the instant claim that the Plaintiff lent the Defendant a sum of KRW 45,300,000,00 to the Defendant. As such, the Defendant did not borrow from the Defendant the payment of the said loan to the Defendant, as well as from the receipt of the payment for the preparation cost and deposit, etc. during the process of sale.
3. Determination
A. The monetary loan agreement is a shot, paid or without compensation, or influenite contract, which is established when one of the parties agrees to transfer the money to the other party, and the other party agrees to return the money in cash. Since the defendant denies the loan agreement against the Plaintiff, the burden of proving that the loan agreement was made exists is against the Plaintiff who asserts that the loan agreement was made.
B. The evidence of the plaintiff's submission alone states that the following circumstances, i.e., the plaintiff also stated to the effect that there was a debate on the purchase of Ecom, that is, the plaintiff would have run a lodging business on the Internetcom on April 1, 2012, the fact that the plaintiff's submission did not prepare a loan certificate in excess of 40,000 won, is difficult to obtain a strong loan, and it does not seem that there was a friendly relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant to lend a large amount of more than 40,000 won without a loan certificate between the plaintiff and the defendant, and that the plaintiff was paid a loan with a content certification of the loan as of April 1, 2013.