beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was, while living together with the Defendant’s father C’s father C, lent a total of KRW 87 million to the Defendant on January 7, 2014, and KRW 37 million on January 20, 2014. Of them, the Plaintiff was paid KRW 52 million. The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder loans of KRW 35 million ( KRW 87 million-52 million) and delay damages therefrom.
2. According to each of the statements in subparagraphs 1 and 2 of subparagraphs A-1 and 2, the Plaintiff may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff remitted each of the KRW 50 million to the Defendant’s name account ( Nonghyup E) and KRW 37 million on January 20, 2014.
However, in light of the following circumstances, each statement of evidence Nos. 3, 4, 11 through 14, which can be recognized by comprehensively considering the purport of the entire pleadings, it is insufficient to recognize that the person who borrowed money from the plaintiff is the defendant only with the above remittance and other statement of evidence No. 3, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
Therefore, the prior plaintiff's assertion is rejected on a different premise.
① The Plaintiff is the father C of the Defendant, and C designated that it should be deposited into the Defendant’s name account.
On January 17, 2014 and January 20, 2014, when the Plaintiff remitted money, negotiations on lending money between the Plaintiff and the Defendant have been conducted.
It does not appear that a loan agreement was concluded or or entered into (i.e., on January 7, 2014) (i.e., on the part of the Plaintiff’s assertion, by phone to the Defendant before the Plaintiff, and (ii) on the account number known by C, remittance of KRW 50 million to the account number of the Plaintiff). ② While the Plaintiff did not obtain any document from the Defendant to verify the loan, such as a loan certificate, the Plaintiff did not obtain any documents from the Defendant, on the other hand, on January 21, 2014 following the last remittance, and confirmed that the Plaintiff invested a certain amount of money from F to the Plaintiff, and did not obtain business approval from the relevant administrative agency.