beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 200,000,000 per annum for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from March 9, 2017 to February 22, 2018.
Reasons
1. Requests for loans;
A. If Gap's evidence No. 3 states the purport of the entire pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff borrowed money from time to time without setting the due date as stated in the attached Form (B) from September 22, 2003 to September 16, 2014, and "the details of repayment" can be acknowledged as the fact that the balance of the loan was 10 million won and there is no counter-proof.
The Plaintiff asserts that, in addition to the amount stated above, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 90,000,000 on November 13, 2013.
According to the evidence No. 3 (Statement of Account Transactions), although the plaintiff was found to have remitted the above amount to the defendant at the time of the above argument, the plaintiff's remittance is recognized as having been made for the "loan Repayment". Thus, the above evidence alone does not prove the fact of lending the plaintiff's assertion, and the plaintiff's assertion in this part is not acceptable because there is no other evidence supporting the above assertion.
Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the balance of the loan 10 million won and delay damages.
B. As to the Defendant’s defense, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff should pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 390 million on Oct. 28, 2005, because the Defendant respectively lent a promissory note with the face value of KRW 150 million on Oct. 28, 2005, ② a promissory note with the face value of KRW 99 million on Jun. 29, 2012, ③ a promissory note with the face value of KRW 150 million on Jul. 27, 2012, and the Plaintiff paid the amount of the relevant promissory note with the face value of KRW 150 million on July 27, 2012.
(A) The Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff is set off with the Plaintiff’s loan claim. According to the statement in the evidence No. 3-1 and No. 2, the Defendant issued each promissory note. (1) The above fact that each promissory note was issued by the Defendant, and (2) the above fact that each promissory note was issued.