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 asserted that on February 18, 2003, when he additionally lent KRW 10 million to the defendant on an additional basis, the plaintiff agreed to pay interest on the total of KRW 15 million with the previous loan amount of KRW 5 million ( KRW 7 million as of December 20, 199 - KRW 2 million as of August 23, 199) (hereinafter "the loan in this case"). Since the defendant paid KRW 1 million out of the principal of the loan in July 31, 2014, he asserts that the plaintiff is liable to pay the above loan amount of KRW 14 million and damages for delay.
As to this, the defendant did not borrow KRW 15 million from the plaintiff, and received intimidation from the plaintiff who was in an internal relationship to his family, from the plaintiff, to make it invalid, the defendant argued that the plaintiff could not respond to the plaintiff's claim, since there was only a hostile payment of the voluntary amount from April 2006 to July 2012.
2. Comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions and the overall purport of the arguments as indicated in Gap evidence Nos. 6, 7, and 8 (including a branch number), the plaintiff withdrawn KRW 6 million from the U.S. Agricultural Cooperative account under the plaintiff's name on December 20, 199, and withdrawn KRW 10 million from the Central Agricultural Cooperative account under the plaintiff's name on February 18, 2003, and the defendant unlawfully transferred KRW 180,000,000,000 to the Central Agricultural Cooperative account under the plaintiff's name during the period from April 27, 2006 to July 13, 2012.
However, the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the results of an order to submit financial transaction information to the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Office for the submission of the financial transaction information and the purport of the entire pleadings in the U.S. High Court, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) on Jan. 5, 2005, the instant complaint lent KRW 15 million to the Defendant on Jan. 5, 2005; and (b) on Apr. 9, 2015, the Plaintiff claimed that the amount of KRW 15 million was loaned to the Defendant on Dec. 15, 2003 as interest-based loans.