logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.02.19 2019가단108643
대여금
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Facts without dispute;

A. On December 24, 2018, Plaintiff A remitted total of KRW 90,00,000 to the Defendant on December 24, 2018, KRW 30,000,000 on January 12, 2019, KRW 10,000 on January 29, 2019, KRW 20,000 on February 11, 2019, and KRW 90,000 on February 19, 2019.

B. On June 4, 2018, Plaintiff B remitted total of KRW 10,00,000 to the Defendant on June 10, 2018, KRW 10,000,000 on June 15, 2018, KRW 20,000 on July 6, 2018, KRW 5,000,000 on August 8, 2018, and KRW 5,000 on August 20, 2018, KRW 10,000 on August 10, 208, and KRW 10,000 on August 8, 2018, KRW 10,000 on December 20, 208, KRW 10,000 on KRW 50,00 on November 9, 200, KRW 000 on May 10, 209, and KRW 5,005;

2. Determination of the parties' arguments

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 90,000 from the Plaintiff A, KRW 85,00,000 from the Plaintiff B, KRW 5,000 from the Plaintiff to each of the 5% interest per month, and KRW 2 months after the due date. Of each of the above amounts, the Defendant repaid KRW 1,50,000 to the Plaintiff A, and KRW 30,70,000 to the Plaintiff B, respectively.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 88,50,000 as the balance of the borrowed money, and KRW 54,30,000 to the Plaintiff B, respectively.

B. The defendant's assertion only invested the above amount to D through the defendant, but does not lend the above amount to the defendant.

C. Even if there is no dispute between the parties to the judgment as to the fact that money was received, when the Defendant contests the Plaintiff’s assertion that the lending was made, the Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the lending was made (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Da26187, Jul. 10, 2014). If it is not clear whether the Plaintiff lent money to the Defendant or not, the Plaintiff should bear the disadvantage in light of the principle of allocation of burden of proof.

The Defendant received a total of KRW 90,00,000 from the Plaintiff, and KRW 85,00,000,000 from the Plaintiff, respectively, as seen earlier. According to each of the evidence Nos. 1, 2-1 through 3, 7, 1, 2, and 5, the Defendant is the Plaintiff.

arrow