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 plaintiff alleged that he had operated C with the defendant, remitted the amount of KRW 10 million to the defendant's account in the name of the defendant under the C Operation Fund, and lent it to the defendant. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the loan of KRW 10 million and delay damages to the plaintiff.
2. Since a loan for consumption is established when one of the parties agrees to transfer the ownership of money or other substitutes to the other party, and the other party agrees to return the same kind, quality, and quantity (Article 598 of the Civil Act). As to the above point, there must be an agreement between the parties.
(Supreme Court Decision 2010Da41263, 41270 Decided November 11, 2010). Moreover, in cases of remitting money to another person’s deposit account, the said remittance may result in various legal causes, such as loan for consumption, donation, repayment, and entrustment of custody or delivery, and thus, it cannot be readily concluded that there was an agreement among the parties to a loan for consumption solely on the fact that such remittance was made. The Plaintiff asserts that the remittance was made on the ground of a loan for consumption. The burden of proving that there was such an agreement with the parties to a loan for consumption cannot be readily concluded.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2012Da30861 Decided July 26, 2012). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the Plaintiff is deemed to have remitted KRW 10 million to the Defendant’s account on December 30, 2016, even though it is recognized that the Plaintiff transferred KRW 10 million to the Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant on December 30, 2016, and the following circumstances, namely, (i) the amount of the C’s operating fund at the time of the said transfer was remaining in excess of KRW 30 million, and (ii) the Plaintiff also transferred KRW 10 million upon request of D, not the Defendant.