beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 45,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from April 19, 2014 to January 16, 2015 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an electrical construction business operator as a new letter of “D” located in Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, and the Plaintiff’s wife E is the president of the credit limit of D.
B. The Defendant, while operating G from Changwon-si, transferred D around 2002 to D. At the time, D was only legalized, and it was decided to build it due to the lack of the public address of Ni and Ni and Ni.do, and concluded a construction contract with H representative, and then transferred KRW 10 million on August 13, 2004, KRW 20 million on September 20, 2004, and KRW 21 million on October 14, 2004 to the account under the name of J, each of his father, who was his father. However, after having received the construction cost, the said construction was suspended while the said construction was conducted.
C. L, which had been made several times according to D Newdon and E-friendly K, was expected to be required for construction costs of KRW 40 million to KRW 50 million upon the Defendant’s request that it be good if L, which had been made several times from the Defendant to build a welfare center from the Defendant, and that the construction cost of KRW 40 million to KRW 50 million would be required. On February 2007, the outer wall construction work of a living hall was followed by the outer wall construction, following the outer wall construction, and the construction cost and other goods cost were put in place in place in the order of the roof construction and floor construction, and received a donation receipt for this.
On February 23, 2007, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 30 million to each Defendant, and KRW 15 million on September 12, 2007.
E. From July 5, 2007 to the 30th day of the same month, the Plaintiff carried out electrical construction works of KRW 34,790,000, and issued a tax invoice therefor.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, witness L's testimony, purport of whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff lent KRW 45 million to the defendant, and thereafter requested the payment of KRW 34,790,000 after the execution of the electrical construction for the D's life hall, the defendant borrowed the construction price, and the quasi-loan contract is concluded.