beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 23,460,00 and the interest rate of KRW 20% per annum from July 23, 2014 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The defendant is between the plaintiff's father and the non-party C.
B. On July 8, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred the Defendant’s deposit account KRW 2,6460,000,000 to August 2, 2013, KRW 4.8 million on August 2, 2013, KRW 8.9 million on September 2, 2013, KRW 200,000 on September 10, 2013, and KRW 7.66 million on February 19, 2014.
C. On September 4, 2013, the Defendant remitted KRW 3 million to the Plaintiff’s deposit account.
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3, purport of the whole pleadings]
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The parties’ assertion asserts that the Plaintiff loaned money by means of remitting money to the Defendant’s deposit account upon the Defendant’s request that money be needed.
In this regard, the defendant asserts that since the defendant received help whenever it is necessary to teach the plaintiff's father C and marriage, his legal nature constitutes a donation, and that he did not borrow money from the plaintiff.
B. In full view of the circumstances acknowledged based on the above basic facts, Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 5 and the purport of the entire arguments, namely, C may have a deposit account in his name and credit card transaction, so if C donates money to the defendant, it would have forwarded money directly through his own account or paid it in cash. However, in this case, the plaintiff transferred money to the defendant through his own account, the period of remittance or remittance amount is not a simple donation, and the defendant paid a certain amount to the plaintiff. The defendant demanded the plaintiff to repay the money to the defendant and his children, including the money in this case, and the defendant would have ordered the defendant to prepare and pay a loan certificate for KRW 47 million. The plaintiff may be deemed to have lent money to the defendant's account, and contrary to this, C donated money to the defendant.