beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The plaintiff and the defendant are in a relationship with a dead village, and C are the plaintiff's birth.
B. On May 12, 2010, the Defendant lent KRW 150,000,000 to C without a separate interest agreement, set the due date as May 19, 2010.
C. On November 2, 201, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 150,000 to the Defendant.
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's evidence 1, testimony and whole oral argument of the witness C
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant, a rural village, needs business funds for the relocation of a factory, and thereafter lent KRW 150,000,000 to the Defendant on November 2, 201 without setting the interest and the due date. As such, the Defendant is obligated to return the Plaintiff’s loan amounting to KRW 150,000,000.
B. On May 12, 2010, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant lent KRW 150,000,000 to C, who is the Plaintiff’s partner, as of May 19, 2010, without a separate interest agreement, with the due date set as of May 19, 2010. Since then C did not repay the said money, the Plaintiff, who is the form of C, paid KRW 150,00,000 to the Defendant on behalf of C on November 2, 2011, and did not borrow the said money from the Plaintiff.
3. Determination
A. In a case where a remittance is made to transfer money to another person's deposit account, the remittance can be made based on various causes, such as loan for consumption, donation, repayment, simple delivery, etc. Therefore, even though there is no dispute as to the fact that the parties are able to receive money, the plaintiff asserts that the cause of receiving money is a loan for consumption, while the defendant asserts that it was received due to a loan for consumption, if so, the plaintiff bears the burden of proof
(See Supreme Court Decision 2012Da30861 Decided July 26, 2012, and 72Da221 Decided December 12, 1972, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Da30861, Jul. 26,
Judgment
The following circumstances are revealed in light of the following facts: Gap evidence 2 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Eul evidence 2 and the purport of the whole pleadings.