beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The plaintiff's assertion that D (at the time of the plaintiff's representative director) purchased No. 103 and No. 1405, the representative director of D (at the time of the plaintiff's assertion) requested the plaintiff to borrow KRW 50,000,000, while "the purchase price was in total, and the purchase price was in total," and the plaintiff lent KRW 50,000 to the defendant on May 30, 2007, so the defendant should pay the above loan and delay damages to the plaintiff.
B. In full view of the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and the whole arguments, the plaintiff can be acknowledged that he remitted 50,000,000 won to the defendant on May 30, 2007 (hereinafter "the money of this case"). However, in light of the following circumstances, Gap evidence No. 1, 3, Gap evidence No. 4, Gap evidence No. 5, Gap evidence No. 7, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 2, Eul evidence No. 8, and Eul evidence No. 8, evidence No. 2-1, witness witness evidence No. 1, part of witness evidence No. D's testimony cannot be trusted, and the remaining evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the money of this case is a loan to the defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
The plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.
① While the Plaintiff received a relatively large amount of money from the Defendant to KRW 50,000,000, the Plaintiff did not prepare any document, such as the receipt of loan.
② On August 2, 2007, after the above remittance date (E. 30 May 30, 2007), the Defendant purchased the right to sell an apartment claimed by the Plaintiff from F, and even thereafter, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the above apartment on December 18, 2008, when about one year and four months elapsed.
③ Not only the company’s own intervention, but also the company located in the same place as the above individual company, such as free use of the check card linked to the Plaintiff’s corporate account at the time of transfer of the instant money.