beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 30,000,000 as well as annual 5% from March 23, 2017 to April 5, 2017 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The fact that the Plaintiff paid KRW 30 million to the Defendant, who is his father, to the Plaintiff, on October 1, 2012 (hereinafter “instant money”), does not conflict between the parties, or is recognized by the purport of the entire pleadings.
2. The parties' assertion
A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant would return only one year to the defendant, and thus the defendant lent 30 million won to the defendant. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay 30 million won and interest thereon to the plaintiff.
B. The defendant's assertion that he received KRW 30 million from the plaintiff, and thus, he cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim.
3. Determination
A. There is no dispute between the parties concerned as to the character of KRW 30 million, or the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments as to each of the statements in subparagraphs 1 through 3, and the Plaintiff’s income earned from labor at a public work establishment conducted from around 1998 to 2010 by the Si-Gun Forestry Cooperatives. As of the date of the closing of argument in this case, the Plaintiff is a beneficiary (old-income households) who is under the age of 79 years old as of the date of the closing of argument in this case. It is difficult to conclude that the Plaintiff donated a considerable amount of money worth KRW 30 million to the Defendant under such economic circumstances as above. On the other hand, the Defendant appears to have been able to maintain his livelihood at 48 years of age or 30 million at the time of receiving KRW 30 million from the Plaintiff. In full view of the relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the background and amount of the Plaintiff’s payment of money, the Plaintiff’s economic power, and the Defendant’s intent at the time of the Plaintiff, etc.
B. There is no evidence to acknowledge the period of reimbursement and interest agreement asserted by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff recognized that there was no interest agreement at the time of the loan. It is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff lent the above KRW 30 million to the Defendant without setting the period of payment and interest.
(c) small decision;