beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 230 million to the Plaintiff; and (b) KRW 5% per annum from January 6, 2015 to June 17, 2015, and the following.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant KRW 15 million on May 15, 2009, KRW 13.10 million on July 13, 2009, KRW 20 million on July 31, 2009, KRW 30 million on August 25, 2009, KRW 30 million on August 25, 2009, and KRW 100 million on April 30, 2010.
B. On December 26, 2008, the Defendant prepared a written confirmation of borrowing KRW 15 million on May 15, 2009, KRW 10 million on July 13, 2009, KRW 20 million on July 31, 2009, KRW 30 million on August 25, 2009, KRW 10 million on April 30, 201, and KRW 230 million on total (hereinafter “written confirmation of borrowing”).
C. The instant letter of loan was prepared to request the Plaintiff to verify the amount already paid to the Defendant. At the time, the Defendant, as it was in the form of “to promptly make an investment,” the Defendant would not give notice to the Plaintiff, but be calculated up to the latest due to circumstances. Therefore, the instant letter of loan was prepared to resolve up to February and March of the year.
On the other hand, on April 8, 2010, the Defendant entered into a service contract to purchase 66 lots of land in C and Kimpo-si D (hereinafter “instant service contract”) and purchased land from the said land owners.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 3, 6, Eul's 1 through 6 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. Whether the instant money is a loan or not does not dispute the facts that the Defendant was a loan. As such, the Defendant did not dispute the remainder of the money except for this loan, and the fact that the Defendant made and made the instant loan confirmation as to the remaining amount of KRW 220 million is recognized as above. In addition, the following circumstances are as follows: (a) the Defendant is able to know by taking into account the following facts: (b) evidence Nos. 6, evidence Nos. 1 through 6, evidence Nos. 1 through 6, witness E’s testimony, and the entire purport of pleading; (c) the Defendant is 150,500,000 won out of May 15, 2009.