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. Facts of recognition;
A. At the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff paid KRW 8.4 million to the Defendant in the form of salary, as a business subsidy, from January 2014 to March 2014.
B. On April 31, 2014, the Defendant retired from the Plaintiff Company and decided to return KRW 8.4 million to the Plaintiff’s company until July 31, 2014.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 7-1, 2, Eul evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from October 5, 2014 to the date of full payment after the copy of the instant complaint was served on the Defendant, as requested by the Plaintiff, as the date the Defendant agreed to pay the said amount to the Plaintiff.
B. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant prepared and submitted to the Plaintiff a written resignation stating that “the Plaintiff would pay KRW 8.4 million, which was supported by the Plaintiff, by July 31, 2014.” However, this is formally prepared and submitted at the Plaintiff’s request. The Defendant’s expression of intent that “the Plaintiff would pay KRW 8.4 million,” which is included therein, is an expression of intention, not a truth, and the Plaintiff knew or could have known that it is not a true intention. However, it is difficult to conclude that “the Plaintiff would pay KRW 8.4 million,” which is included in the written resignation Nos. 4 and 5 alone, constitutes an expression of intention, not a true intention, and the Plaintiff was aware or could have known that it was not a true intention, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise, the Defendant’s assertion is rejected.
3. The conclusion is that the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and the judgment of the court of first instance is concluded.