beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 80,000,000 as well as annual 5% from December 27, 2018 to May 8, 2020, respectively, to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant knew that high school was established for a long time.
Around June 2011, the Defendant was to operate a pharmacy as a head of a high school and a head of a Dong, and paid to C with KRW 55 million received from the Plaintiff, but failed to actually open a pharmacy due to the nonperformance of the construction of the new pharmacy building.
B. Around July 2012, the Defendant sought to operate a pharmacy again with C and D, and around that time, received KRW 45 million from the Plaintiff and performed its investment obligation.
C. Around May 2015, the Defendant prepared and rendered to the Plaintiff a loan certificate with the following content (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”).
Amount of a loan certificate: 100,000,000 (one hundred million won per day) on July 25, 2011: The borrower: (a) the fact that there is no dispute over B [based]; (b) the entry of the evidence No. 1; and (c) the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The parties' assertion
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was twice lent a total of KRW 100 million to the Defendant.
Since both C and D are the plaintiff's will, there is no reason for the plaintiff to invest indirectly in the operation of a pharmacy through the defendant.
Since the Plaintiff received KRW 20 million from the Defendant as interest, it shall not be appropriated for the repayment of principal.
B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff invested KRW 100 million in the Defendant’s pharmacy business on the condition that 40% of the Defendant’s profit was paid. From September 2012 to August 2015, the Defendant paid KRW 120,000 to the Plaintiff the monthly profit of KRW 1.5 million. On May 2015, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to prepare a loan certificate for KRW 100,000 as a matter of the Defendant’s wife and issued the instant loan certificate. (2) Even if the amount of KRW 100,000,000 received from the Plaintiff was a loan loan, there was no assertion as to the fact that there was an agreement on the interest on the said loan, and thus, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff from around September 2012 to August 2015.