beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
Opinions of the Parties
A. The Plaintiff asserted: (a) the Defendant; (b) KRW 4 million on August 4, 2014; (c) KRW 2.5 million on August 6, 2014; and (d) KRW 2.0 million on August 8, 2014; (c) KRW 17,5 million on November 17, 2014; (d) KRW 10,000 on November 27, 2014; (e) KRW 3 million on April 29, 2015; and (e) KRW 27 million on June 9, 2015; and (e) the Defendant loaned only KRW 2.5 million on June 26, 2015 to the Plaintiff.
Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 3,1650,000 (= KRW 4,1650,000 - KRW 10,000) and damages for delay.
B. Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant lent KRW 10 million from the Plaintiff on November 27, 2014, but repaid all of them on December 10, 2014, and December 29, 2014. 2) In relation to the remaining details of loans claimed by the Plaintiff, the Defendant received the money from the Plaintiff on the date of the Plaintiff’s assertion, but the Defendant did not borrow from the Plaintiff whether it received the payment for the repayment of the existing debt or the payment for the severance from employment.
2. The Plaintiff’s loan of KRW 10 million to the Defendant on November 27, 2014, but received reimbursement of KRW 10 million thereafter does not conflict between the parties. Therefore, the existence of the remainder of the loan alleged by the Plaintiff is examined.
The fact that the Defendant received money from the Plaintiff as alleged by the Plaintiff does not conflict between the parties, and that the Plaintiff contacted the Defendant on June 10, 2016, by taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement No. 2 of the evidence No. 2, the Plaintiff sent text messages to the Defendant on June 10, 2016.
However, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the respective statements in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 8 (including paper numbers), the witness C’s testimony, namely, ① the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not prepare a loan certificate, and the Defendant also remitted to the Plaintiff KRW 1.3 million on April 25, 2014, KRW 180,000 on May 1, 2014, KRW 250,000 on May 17, 2014, KRW 6.5 million on July 26, 2014, ② the Plaintiff.