beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 230,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from June 1, 2013 to April 15, 2015 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. According to the purport of the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 1 and the entire pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 280,000,000 to the Defendant from June 2007 to February 2013, and received reimbursement of KRW 50,000 among them, and the Defendant paid KRW 230,000,000 to the Plaintiff on March 25, 2013.
5. up to 31. Performance
"It is recognized that it has drawn up a certificate of borrowing."
According to this, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 230,000,000 won with 5% per annum as stipulated by the Civil Act from June 1, 2013 to April 15, 2015, which is the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, 20% per annum as stipulated under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings until September 30, 2015, and 20% per annum as stipulated under the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26553, Sept. 25, 2015) and 15% per annum as stipulated under the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day
2. The Defendant’s argument regarding the Defendant’s assertion: (a) around August 2014, agreed that the Plaintiff leased sound equipment owned by the Defendant and agreed to repay the leased profit to the loan; and (b) the same year as the eightth of the same month.
9. 1. The Defendant’s acquisition of the Defendant’s sound system throughout January 1. The Plaintiff asserts that the lease proceeds of the said sound system is presumed to have accrued at least KRW 30 million per week until now from the lease proceeds of at least KRW 1,440,00,000 ( KRW 30,000 x 48 weeks). Thus, the Defendant’s loan was fully repaid, and the Plaintiff ought to return unjust enrichment to the Defendant or compensate for damages.
However, the Plaintiff agreed to lease the sound equipment owned by the Defendant to repay the leased profit to the loan solely with each of the descriptions of Nos. 1 and 2, and evidence Nos. 3 and 4.
It is not sufficient to recognize that the rental income has been obtained as alleged by the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
Plaintiff
A part of the sound system is itself.