beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court of the first instance’s explanation concerning the instant case is as follows: (a) the first instance judgment No. 4; (b) the first instance judgment No. 2; and (c) the second instance judgment No. 5; and (d) the first instance judgment No. 20; and (c) the second instance judgment No. 1; and (d) the Defendant newly asserted or asserts again in the trial, as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment; and (e) the same shall be cited by the main sentence of
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The Defendant’s assertion 1) According to the reasoning for the Defendant’s non-prosecution of the instant criminal complaint case, it was confirmed that KRW 130 million was not a loan but a loan, and as long as the Plaintiff did not make any additional investment, the instant agreement remains null and void. 2) Even if the loan is not an investment, the person who lent KRW 130 million to the Plaintiff is not the Plaintiff.
B. The Defendant’s assertion that the amount the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant is not a loan, but an investment loan, the Plaintiff’s non-resident’s assertion that it is against the contents of the loan certificate, which is a disposal document, and there is no clear and acceptable evidence to deny its contents. Rather, in full view of the evidence in the first instance judgment, the evidence in the Eul evidence No. 6 and No. 7 (including the serial number) and the purport of the entire pleadings in the testimony of the witness J, the actual operator E and J should jointly invest and complete the construction project site and divide the profits by 50% each, and then divide the profits by 50% each. E and J, while running a business as the Defendant corporation, purchased the land for the construction project under the Defendant’s name while running the business, purchased the land for the construction project under the Defendant’s name, and provided the Defendant with a loan of KRW 130 million,000,000,0000,000 from the bank to the Defendant, and the Defendant purchased the land for the construction project from the Plaintiff.