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
Basic Facts
A. On July 14, 2010, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 20,000,00 to the Defendant’s corporate bank account from the NongHyup Bank under his own name C to the Defendant’s corporate bank account.
B. The Plaintiff filed a criminal charge of fraud while the Defendant borrowed the above KRW 20,000,000 from the Defendant. However, D stated that a person who borrowed the above money from an investigative agency was not the Defendant and received KRW 19,00,000 out of the said money from the Defendant. Ultimately, the Defendant was subject to a non-prosecution disposition on September 25, 2015.
(Seoul Southern District Public Prosecutor's Office No. 43148 of 2015 / [based grounds for recognition] / [Article 43148 of the Seoul Southern District Public Prosecutor's Office] / The plaintiff's assertion of the parties concerned as to Gap's 1, 4, Eul's 1, and Eul's 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings is that if the plaintiff's assertion of the parties concerned about the whole purport of the pleadings lends the plaintiff 20,000,000 won to the plaintiff, it would allow the plaintiff
Accordingly, the plaintiff transferred the above money to the defendant on the 14th of the same month.
Around July 2010, the plaintiff asserted by the defendant that he want to provide the defendant with a loan to D difficult to pay the above amount of KRW 20,000,000 to the defendant's account under the name of the defendant.
Accordingly, the defendant only delivered the above money to D, and it is not a party to D borrowed the above money.
Judgment
The fact that the Plaintiff remitted the above KRW 20,000,000 to the account under the name of the Defendant is not a dispute between the original and the Defendant.
(2) The Plaintiff stated that the Plaintiff borrowed the instant loan from the Defendant on the following grounds: (a) although the Plaintiff stated that the Plaintiff borrowed the instant loan from the investigative agency, it did not mean that the Plaintiff would have borrowed money on the other hand; and (b) the Plaintiff stated that the Plaintiff would have borrowed money from the Defendant.