beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 14.6 million with respect to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s annual rate from August 20, 2015 to December 13, 2016, and the following.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 230 million to the Defendant from September 20, 2004 to October 18, 2006. However, the Defendant repaid to the Plaintiff a total of KRW 1354 million.
Therefore, the Plaintiff still remains a claim for loans of KRW 96.3 million against the Defendant (i.e., loans of KRW 230 million - KRW 135.4 million).
However, the Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant only sought payment of KRW 40 million, which recognized the existence of the obligation on May 19, 2012, and damages for delay, among the loan balance.
B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant borrowed a total of KRW 150 million from the Plaintiff, and the Defendant’s assertion that the loans do not remain at present by repaying the total of KRW 167.1 million from around 2004 to May 2012 to the Plaintiff.
2. Determination
A. First, we examine the Plaintiff’s remaining loan claims amount.
There is no dispute between the parties on the fact that the Plaintiff and the Defendant have continued to lend and repay each other over a long period of time.
However, there is no objective data such as the loan certificate, receipts, and financial transactions related thereto, so the plaintiff and the defendant do not have sufficient proof of the amount of loan and the amount of repayment.
If so, in principle, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving the amount of loan and the defendant bears the burden of proving the amount of loan, but if the amount of loan is not verified, the minimum amount recognized by each other shall be used as the basis of judgment.
First, with respect to the amount of the Plaintiff’s loan, the Plaintiff submitted some financial transaction details or his/her pocket book.
However, it is difficult to recognize that the portion withdrawn in cash due to the details of financial transactions or the substitute details without the recipient was paid to the Defendant in full, and the pocket book is also prepared by the Plaintiff directly.