beta
Text
1. Of the part regarding the counterclaim in the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 53,205,80 against the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant).
Reasons
1. According to the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2-1, 2, and 15 of the Plaintiff’s main claim, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is liable to pay to the Plaintiff the aggregate amounting to KRW 43,736,00,00 for several occasions from September 9, 2010 to October 8, 2010. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the aggregate amounting to KRW 43,736,00 and delay damages therefrom.
On September 28, 2010, the Defendant alleged to the effect that on September 28, 2010, the Plaintiff repaid KRW 3,000,000 out of the above aggregate amount, but the following:
2.(a)
③ The preliminary assertion is not accepted in respect of the loan amounting to KRW 3,000,000.
The statement No. 3 alone is insufficient to acknowledge the defendant's above assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, so the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
2. Determination as to the defendant's claim on the main lawsuit and the counterclaim
A. The defendant's assertion that the defendant has a claim of KRW 220,514,100 (= KRW 42,580,000) in total, KRW 77,544,500,000, KRW 97,389,600) as follows, the defendant asserts that the above claim of the plaintiff's aggregate payment is set off against the plaintiff's above claim to the extent of equal amount, and that the remaining amount is claimed as a counterclaim.
① From March 4, 2008 to October 12, 2008, the Plaintiff paid KRW 202,580,000 to the Plaintiff as follows, and the Plaintiff supplied aggregate from the said advance payment and settled it by means of deducting the aggregate amount from the said advance payment. Since the Defendant’s supply of aggregate from the Plaintiff is merely equivalent to KRW 160,000,00, the Defendant’s excessive payment of KRW 42,580,000 (=202,580,000 - 160,000,000) after the completion of the transaction.
On March 4, 2008, Defendant 2,000 on March 5, 2008, Defendant 1,000 on March 12, 2008, asserting that the remitter was not the remitter of the remittance date and the Defendant directly remitted the remittance amount, and Defendant 2,00 on April 16, 2008 May 2, 2008.