beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The reasons for the acceptance of the first instance judgment are as follows, except for the addition of the following '2. Additional Judgment' as to the assertion that the plaintiffs are satisfied as the reasons for appeal by this court, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination
A. In light of the following: (a) the amount of money transferred by the Plaintiff to the Defendant is a large amount; (b) the deposit date is not fixed; and (c) the amount is not fixed; and (d) the Defendant’s transfer of KRW 1,415,293, April 29, 2019, which was asserted that the Defendant terminated his/her relationship with the Plaintiff, even after the end of March 26, 2013; and (b) the payment of living expenses or money is not considered as payment of money.
The plaintiff has lent money to the defendant because it is difficult for the plaintiff to live, and since the details of the borrowed money are clearly revealed in the financial transaction details, it is only impossible to receive a separate loan certificate.
In light of the fact that the Defendant partially repaid the amount of KRW 1,00,000 on October 13, 2010, and KRW 8,300,000 on November 4, 2010, the amount transferred by the Plaintiff to the Defendant is not a donation for the loan.
B. Determination 1) In the event of a transfer of money to another person’s deposit account, such transfer may be made based on various legal causes, such as a loan for consumption, a gift, and a repayment, so it cannot be readily concluded solely on the fact that such transfer had been made (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da30861, Jul. 26, 2012). The burden of proving that such transfer was in accord with the intent of a party to a loan for consumption is the Plaintiff who asserts that the transfer was made due to a loan for consumption (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Da26187, Jul. 10, 2014). In addition, whether the payment of money unilaterally continued against the same other party is a donation is related to the parties concerned.