beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff asserts that, on April 18, 2013, the Plaintiff loaned money to the Defendant’s denied C and lent KRW 8 million to the Defendant’s account (hereinafter “instant loan”), which was known to C on April 18, 2013, by means of deposit without passbook (hereinafter “instant loan”). Since the person who received the said money is the Defendant and the Defendant actually used the said money, the Defendant is obligated to pay 5.6 million won out of the instant loan, which was not yet repaid to the Plaintiff.
In full view of the overall purport of the statements and arguments by evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the Plaintiff made a deposit of KRW 8 million with the Defendant’s Busan Bank account on April 18, 2013; and the Plaintiff’s Nonghyup Bank account during the period from May 10, 2013 to November 29, 2013, the sum of KRW 2,40,000 in the Defendant’s name was deposited five times in the Defendant’s name during the period from May 10, 2013 to November 29, 2013; however, it is insufficient to find that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone was leased KRW 8 million by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
[In full view of the purport of each of the statements and arguments in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, and 8, as well as the whole of the statements and arguments in the above case: ① A promise certificate prepared and issued by C to the Plaintiff is merely a statement that C borrowed KRW 5 million and KRW 8 million from the Plaintiff as an investment bond in futures option; ② the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the return of the loan, etc. in this case to C and obtained a favorable judgment on July 24, 2014 (U.S. District Court Decision 2013Da194243). The Plaintiff asserted that the document submitted in the above case was lent money to C; ③ In full view of the above circumstances, it is recognized that the Plaintiff lent money to C; ③ written confirmation of the non-deposit deposit sheet (No. 8 evidence) submitted to the loan lawsuit against the Plaintiff (the Defendant’s husband’s name) was written as “the obligor’s husband.” This is merely a person who borrowed KRW 8 million from the Plaintiff to C.
Plaintiff
In addition, "C" receives monthly pay from 400 to 500, so C borrows money from the Plaintiff.