beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant operated a construction business from around 1994 to August 22, 200 under the trade name of C Co., Ltd.
B. On June 14, 200, the Defendant received a discount of KRW 15 million from the Plaintiff, and received KRW 13,500,000 as a discount from the Plaintiff, because the Defendant said that the Plaintiff would settle the payment of the promissory note at a discount of KRW 15 million (the bill number D, issuer C corporation, and due date July 14, 200).
C. Around June 23, 2000, the Defendant: (a) stated that the Plaintiff would settle the Promissory Notes amounting to KRW 11 million one month after the date of discount; (b) received a discount from the Plaintiff, and (c) received KRW 9,00,000 from the Plaintiff at a discount of one promissory Notes amounting to KRW 11 million.
Around November 29, 2001, the Defendant drafted to the Plaintiff a certificate of loan stating that the Plaintiff will repay KRW 26 million by June 30, 2003, and prepared a certificate of confirmation that the Defendant would repay KRW 26 million by the end of March 2007.
E. The defendant 1-2
(b).
The act of fraud was prosecuted as a crime of fraud and was convicted of two years of suspended sentence on September 11, 2007.
(Seoul District Court Decision 2007Ma114 delivered on September 11, 2007, hereinafter the criminal case of this case). The above judgment was finalized on September 19, 2007.
【Reasons for Recognition】 The descriptions of Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The judgment of the court below is based on the defendant's loan of KRW 24.5 million to the defendant two times around June 200, and since the plaintiff did not pay the total amount of KRW 26.6 million after paying the principal and interest, the plaintiff is obligated to pay the above money to the defendant, barring any special circumstance, since there is no dispute that the defendant borrowed money as above, the defendant is obligated to pay the above money to the plaintiff.
In this regard, the defendant asserts that since the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is a commercial claim, the five-year commercial extinctive prescription has expired.