beta
Text
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff's assertion that since from around 2009, the plaintiff used money from the defendant to repay all the interest calculated at a rate of 10 to 20% per month in the loan principal, and even according to each account in the name of the plaintiff's children C and D, the plaintiff's total amount transferred to each account in the name of the defendant, the defendant's wife E and his wife from around 2009 to 2014 reaches KRW 1,310,630,00, while the defendant's total amount of money transferred to the plaintiff is not equivalent to KRW 307,50,000,000 and the defendant's debt remains in excess of interest rate of KRW 307,50,000. Thus, the plaintiff's claim for confirmation as to whether the plaintiff's obligation to repay the loan to the defendant remains.
2. Ex officio determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit, where the Plaintiff, an obligor, claims in a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of a pecuniary obligation, and asserted that the cause of the instant lawsuit was denied by specifying the claim, the Defendant, the obligee, bears the burden of proving the facts constituting the elements of legal relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da45259, Mar. 13, 1998). In addition, the Plaintiff, at least, specified the amount of the obligation for which the Plaintiff seeks confirmation of absence, the time of occurrence, the cause of occurrence,
However, since the plaintiff did not specify the amount and time of the loan debt seeking confirmation of absence until the date of closing argument of this case, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful since the lawsuit of this case is not specified.
Unless the subject-matter of a lawsuit is specified, the case shall be judged.
Even if the plaintiff's claim is specified, there is no practical benefit in determining the merits, and even if the plaintiff's claim is specified, it is not sufficient to recognize the plaintiff's claim, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.