beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff loaned KRW 31 million to the Defendant: ① on July 4, 2006; ② on May 31, 2007; ② on June 14, 2007; ④ on December 26, 2007, KRW 5 million; ④ on November 4, 2011, KRW 10 million; ② on November 5, 201, KRW 300,000,000 to the Defendant and C; ② on November 9, 201, KRW 30,000,000; ② on November 5, 201, KRW 30,000; ② on November 28, 2011, KRW 50,000,000; and ② on December 24, 2011, KRW 300,000,000,000,000,05 won; and
Therefore, the Defendant, jointly and severally with C, is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 84 million and the Plaintiff with interest or delay damages at the rate of KRW 20% per annum from the day following the date of the last delivery of the claim of this case and the written application for modification of the cause of the claim sought by each Plaintiff.
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. As to the claim that the Defendant lent KRW 31 million to the Defendant, the fact that the Defendant borrowed KRW 20 million from the Plaintiff at the interest rate of KRW 4 to 6% per month on May 31, 2007, KRW 5 million, KRW 30 million on June 14, 2007, KRW 10 million on June 14, 2007, and ④ December 26, 2007, KRW 20 million on December 26, 2007.
On the other hand, it is argued that ① on July 4, 2006, KRW 100,000,000 was not borrowed from the Plaintiff, and thus, it is viewed as follows.
The fact that the Plaintiff remitted KRW 10 million to the Defendant on July 4, 2006 is recognized by the statement in Gap evidence No. 5, but the following circumstances acknowledged by adding the whole purport of the pleadings to the entries in Gap evidence No. 4-11 and Eul evidence No. 5, namely, the Defendant deposited the above money to D, a multi-level company, on the day when the Plaintiff received the above KRW 11 million from the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff lent KRW 31 million to the Defendant around 2006-207 at the time of the prosecutor’s investigation into the criminal case against the Defendant at the time of 2006-207, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 11 million to the Defendant, and KRW 20 million, among which the principal was paid KRW 11 million.
In full view of the fact that the Plaintiff made a statement to the lower court, the Plaintiff was invested in D through the Defendant’s account and invested money.