beta
Text
The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal are the judgment of the first instance.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for further determination as follows. Thus, this is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Additional determination
A. The plaintiff's assertion did not know that the defendant was a merchant at the time of lending money, and since the defendant borrowed money as an individual's qualification, not an insurance agency, the defendant cannot be viewed as a merchant. Even if the defendant is a merchant, the defendant's borrowing of money for the substitute payment of the insurance premium is not a commercial activity.
B. 1) Determination 1) The Defendant, a merchant operating an insurance agency, was presumed to have borrowed money from the Plaintiff for business purposes, and there is no other evidence to reverse this. Even if the Plaintiff was unaware of the fact that the Defendant was a merchant at the time of lending money to the Defendant, or the use of money.
Even if such circumstance alone does not change (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da87294, Jan. 28, 2010). Rather, the following circumstances, which the Plaintiff submitted to this court additionally, comprehensively considering the overall purport of the entries and changes in Gap evidence Nos. 10 through 16, which were submitted to the court, (i) the Defendant runs an insurance agency from April 25, 1997 to July 31, 201; (ii) the Plaintiff was introduced by the Defendant that the Plaintiff would act as an insurance designer around 2002 (No. 10, No. 11, No. 3), and (iii) the Plaintiff loaned money from the Defendant from March 202 to July 21, 200 to the Defendant with interest rate No. 5 (No. 1, 200 if the Plaintiff borrowed money from the Defendant to the insurance agent, and the Plaintiff was promised to borrow money from the Defendant to May 21, 201.