beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff's assertion
A. The Defendant loaned money to the Plaintiff, “Seng-gu Daejeon District and the third floor buildings with three floors above the ground.”
On January 29, 2016, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 36 million to the Defendant’s deposit account, and KRW 76 million in total by remitting KRW 40 million on February 18, 2016.
B. On February 12, 2016, the Defendant purchased the said real estate on February 12, 2016 and completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 18, 2016, by adding up the money it borrowed from the Plaintiff KRW 76 million.
C. The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the borrowed amount of KRW 76 million and damages for delay.
2. Determination
A. There is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the Plaintiff remitted the Defendant’s deposit account, ① KRW 36 million on January 29, 2016, ② KRW 40 million on February 18, 2016, respectively.
(B) The sum of KRW 76 million that the Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant’s account (hereinafter “instant money”).
With respect to the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant money is a loan, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant’s mother E was only the money that the Defendant received from the Plaintiff using the Defendant’s passbook, but is not the money borrowed from the Plaintiff.
C. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant lent money even if the number of money was recognized, is dissatisfied with the Plaintiff’s assertion that the cause of the payment of money would be based on the loan for consumption (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da73179, Sept. 15, 2015) and the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant’s mother acquired KRW 40 million from the Plaintiff, including the instant money, and embezzled KRW 8792,00,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won was alleged. ② E was prosecuted for fraud and occupational embezzlement; ③ this Court was convicted of a one-year imprisonment with labor for E on December 19, 2017; and the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 15, 2018; ④ the Plaintiff and the Defendant prior to the instant lawsuit.