beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.
Reasons
1. The assertion and judgment
A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) around May 2012, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff’s father B to lend KRW 30 million as the contract deposit for H land sales contract was insufficient. On June 1, 2012, the Plaintiff loaned a total of KRW 80 million to the Defendant including the money lent to the Defendant on June 1, 2012, but the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff KRW 100 million by March 30, 2013.
Since the Plaintiff’s provisional attachment of F land owned by the Defendant around September 2017, the Defendant paid KRW 20 million, the Defendant should pay the remainder of KRW 80 million after deducting the aforementioned loan from KRW 100 million.
(2) In a case where the authenticity of the judgment document is recognized, the existence of a juristic act in its content must be recognized, barring special circumstances where there is clear and acceptable that the existence and content of the declaration of intent indicated in the document can be denied.
(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da38602 Decided October 13, 200, etc.). According to the evidence No. 1 of this case, the Defendant borrowed KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff on June 1, 2012 and prepared a certificate of loan (Evidence No. 1 of this case; hereinafter “the certificate of loan”) with the effect that the Defendant would repay the loan by March 30, 2013. Accordingly, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 80 million with the exception of KRW 20 million paid by the Defendant at KRW 10 million, and delay damages therefrom.
B. On July 24, 2012, the Defendant’s assertion (1) purchased the H land in the amount of KRW 750 million on the condition that the sales contract becomes null and void if the building permit was not granted from G on July 24, 2012 for the purpose of building and selling a row house.
However, the defendant, at the time, to B, the plaintiff's attached at the time, 7.7.