beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff, based on the facts, remitted the Defendant’s total amount of KRW 20,00,00 on December 16, 2010, KRW 80,000,000 on the account in the name of C, D, E, or F, and KRW 80,000 on January 4, 201, KRW 80,000 on February 28, 2011, KRW 20,000 on June 9, 201, KRW 10,000 on June 10, 201, KRW 30,000,000 on June 10, 201, KRW 30,000 on July 29, 201, KRW 80,000 on August 24, 201, KRW 30,000 on the basis of the facts
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff lent to the Defendant a total of KRW 340,00,000,000 for each of the above transfers. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder after deducting the amount that the Defendant repaid from the above loans to January 6, 2012 from the amount of the Defendant’s repayment from December 20, 2010 to January 6, 2012, the principal amount of KRW 184,791,548 and damages for delay. 2) The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff would have sought to make an investment in the Plaintiff and to make an investment in the Plaintiff, and the Defendant introduced E.
The amount of KRW 340,00,000, which the Plaintiff remitted to the account in the name of C, D, E, or F, is the amount of investment in E.
B. Determination 1) Even if there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that money has been received, when the Defendant contests the Plaintiff’s assertion that the lending was made between the parties, the Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the lending was made (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 72Da221, Dec. 12, 1972; 2014Da26187, Jul. 10, 2014). 2) In addition, it is difficult to conclude that the amount of KRW 340,00,00 that the Plaintiff remitted to the account of C, etc. was remitted to the Defendant. In addition, even if the Defendant received money from the Plaintiff using the said account under the name of C, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the Plaintiff lent money to the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.
3. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.