beta
Text
1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. In full view of the facts based on Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 7 and the purport of the whole pleadings in the testimony of the party witness D, the fact that Eul, the husband of the plaintiff, took out a loan of KRW 15,00,000 from the Hyundai Heavy Industries Community Credit Cooperatives on April 23, 2009, the plaintiff remitted the above loan to the defendant on the same day, and the defendant again delivered the above money transferred from the plaintiff to F.
2. The allegations by the parties and the determination thereof
A. The plaintiff asserts that he lent the above KRW 15,00,000 to the defendant.
The defendant asserts that he did not borrow the above 15,000,000 won, but received the above money at the plaintiff's request and delivered it to F.
B. In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in the testimony of the party witness D and Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 7, and 8, the plaintiff lent 15,00,000 won to the defendant so that the defendant can lend money to F and receive a reasonable interest, and at the time the plaintiff and the defendant at the time set the amount of KRW 80,000 per month equivalent to the interest on the loan that E bears interest on the above loan.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to return the above loan amount of KRW 15,00,000 to the plaintiff.
3. Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 80,000 won per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from October 24, 2009 to November 18, 2015, which is the date of this decision, from October 24, 2009, which is the date of lending KRW 15,000,000 to the plaintiff, and from November 24, 2015, which is the date of this decision, from November 18, 2015, which is the date of this decision. Thus, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted within the above recognized scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claim shall be dismissed as without any justifiable reason. Since the judgment of the court of first instance has partially different conclusions, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money