beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and counterclaim claims filed by this court are dismissed.
2. Costs of appeal; and
Reasons
1. Determination on the main claim
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) around May 2013, the Plaintiff lent KRW 10 million to the Defendant for the use of high water business expenses; and (b) the Defendant, upon the Defendant’s request, is liable to pay the amount of KRW 18 million to D account on March 10, 2014; and (c) KRW 13,300,000,000 to the registration tax and the fees for certified judicial scrivener accounts on April 1, 2014; and (d) lent KRW 43,519,00,00,000,000 in total, for each transfer of KRW 2,219,00,000 to D account.
B. 1) First of all, there is no evidence to acknowledge the loan amounting to KRW 10 million on or around May 2013. Therefore, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit. 2) Next, the Plaintiff’s health account as to KRW 33,519,00 for the remaining loan amounting to KRW 33,519,00, and the Plaintiff’s loaning KRW 33,519,000 to D and E’s account at the Defendant’s request on or around March 10 and April 1, 2014 does not conflict between the parties.
Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff KRW 33,519,00 and delay damages for the loans that have not been repaid to the plaintiff.
3) As to this, the defendant asserted that the above 43.2 million won should be offset against the debt of the above borrowed amount with the automatic bond, although he/she managed the plaintiff's room instead of the plaintiff's room from February 2, 2012 to September 2014 (i.e., monthly wage of KRW 1,350,000 x 32 months). Thus, it is insufficient to recognize that the defendant, based on the evidence submitted by the defendant, managed the plaintiff's room for the above period, or that he/she agreed to receive the payment in return for the plaintiff's room management, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise, and therefore, the defendant's defense is without merit.
2. The judgment on the counterclaim claim is 43,200,000 won of the benefits that the Defendant did not receive from the Plaintiff even though the Defendant maintained the Plaintiff’s room instead of the Plaintiff’s room from February 2, 2012 to September 2014.