logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원강릉지원 2019.10.08 2019나316
대여금
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Upon the Defendant’s request, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 9,00,000 to C’s account on December 20, 2017, and KRW 6,00,000 to the Defendant’s bank account on December 21, 2017.

B. On March 28, 2018, the Defendant returned KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Even if there is no dispute over the fact that the parties exchange money, the plaintiff asserts that the cause of receiving money is a loan for consumption, while the defendant asserts that it is a loan for consumption, the plaintiff bears the responsibility to prove that it is a loan for consumption.

(Supreme Court Decision 72Da221 Decided December 12, 1972, and Supreme Court Decision 2014Da26187 Decided July 10, 2014). B.

In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that: (a) the Plaintiff, who had no particular occupation or ability, donated KRW 15,00,000 to the Defendant as alleged by the Defendant; (b) even according to the Defendant’s assertion, the source of money that the Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant is the mother and mother; and (c) the Defendant returned KRW 10,000,000 out of KRW 15,000,000, which was remitted from the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff on March 28, 2018, is the amount that the Plaintiff returned to the Plaintiff on March 28, 2018.

C. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to refund to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 5,00,000,000, out of the borrowed amount, and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from January 5, 2019 to the date of full payment, which is clear that it is the day following the delivery of a copy of the instant complaint.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance which accepted the Plaintiff’s claim is justifiable, and the Defendant’s appeal against this is justified.

arrow