beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant, one’s father’s father and wife, lent KRW 55,00,000,000 to the university located in Seoul around February 201, to the Defendant without interest at the end of February 2015, and that the Defendant donated the money to the Plaintiff.
B. As alleged by the Defendant, the Plaintiff asserts that, even if the said KRW 55,00,000 lent by the Plaintiff was a donation, the said donation was not written donation, or the Defendant committed an act of inflicting injury upon the Plaintiff on July 18, 2013, which requires medical treatment for about four weeks. As such, the Plaintiff asserts that the said donation was rescinded.
2. Determination
A. According to the records of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, there is no dispute between the parties or between the plaintiff and his wife, and the second son and son and son's children between the plaintiff and his wife, the defendant, from around February 21, 201, had been living in Busan with his family including the plaintiff, and entered the Gyeong National University located in Busan, and accordingly, the plaintiff's husband and wife (which is currently in the divorce lawsuit) had the defendant established a house to reside in Seoul. Accordingly, the defendant leased the building Nos. 55,00,000 in Seoul Dongdaemun-gu and 102 to the defendant around February 21, 201, and the plaintiff transferred KRW 55,00,000 to C around February 21, 2011. However, the facts alone are insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff lent 5,00,000 won to the defendant, who is his father and son, to this part of the plaintiff's assertion is not acceptable.
B. Even if the above KRW 55,00,000 is not a loan, it is difficult to view the above money as the amount that the Plaintiff donated to the Defendant without delay, and thus, it is also rejected the Plaintiff’s claim for cancellation of donation premised on this premise.
C. Home affairs, even if the Plaintiff donated KRW 55,00,000 to the Defendant, the gift was not based on written donation, but the Defendant around July 2013.