beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff's assertion
A. On February 11, 2011, the Plaintiff made an oral agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant to pay 50% of the profit after disposing of the said marina, if the Plaintiff invested the funds in operating D in the Gu in the YYA, and accordingly, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 150,000,000 from F as security for the land E (the instant land) in the light-name city.
B. After disposing of the said marina, the Defendant acquired the shares of marina (the instant marina) located in Boan-si G at the Defendant’s request, and the Plaintiff, upon the Defendant’s request, invested KRW 50,000,000 in the sum of KRW 200,000,000,000 in total, which was leased from H as security (the sum totaling KRW 150,000,000,000, which was leased from F) with the instant land (the sum totaling KRW 150,000,000,000 to H).
C. However, as the Defendant failed to properly operate the instant marina, the Plaintiff first received a certificate of borrowing KRW 200,000 from the Defendant on March 11, 2014 regarding the principal of investment from the Defendant, and then recovered the principal through a lawsuit. However, the Defendant thereafter did not sell the instant marina’s shares to KRW 630,000,000, and did not pay the Plaintiff’s share profits even if he left for profits.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay 280,000,000 won (630,00,000 won - Plaintiff’s investment amount of 200,000,000 won - Defendant’s investment amount of 150,000,000 won (280,000,000 won x 200,000 won) out of the profit of selling the instant marina (350,000,000 won).
2. The Defendant’s use of KRW 200,00,000 in the money borrowed from F or H as security for the instant land owned by the Plaintiff is not a dispute between the parties.
(The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff provided the instant land as collateral to the Defendant’s F or H with respect to the loan borrowed from the Defendant’s F or H, thereby becoming a surety. However, in full view of the descriptions described in the Plaintiff’s F, B, 1, and 6, the Plaintiff on January 2014.