beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff, on October 23, 2012, extended the credit card loan to B by setting the maturity on October 22, 2013 due date and by setting the maturity date as repayment at the maturity date. After October 25, 2013, the maturity was extended to October 24, 2014 by means of lending credit cards under the same conditions, but the interest was overdue after February 25, 2014. On July 23, 2013, the Plaintiff extended the credit card loan loan by setting the credit card loan loan by means of equal repayment of principal and interest, etc., and concluded that each of the above loan loan agreement was lost by setting the maturity date and interest on November 25, 2013, and that each of the above loan agreement was null and void on July 22, 2015.
B. The Plaintiff’s claim against B based on each of the above card loans is KRW 23,014,079 as of April 14, 2015 (the principal amount of KRW 18,404,00 among them).
C. The Defendant and B filed a marriage report on July 5, 1978, but around March 2013, the Defendant brought a divorce lawsuit against B with the Seoul Family Court No. 2013Dhap2887, and concluded a divorce conciliation on March 7, 2014.
The instant apartment was owned by B’s denying net C, and after the registration of ownership transfer was completed due to inheritance due to the agreement division held on February 18, 2009 by B on April 27, 2009, the registration of ownership transfer was completed with respect to 1/2 shares of the instant apartment on the same day.
After February 11, 2014, B completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of the instant donation with respect to one-half shares among the apartment units of this case.
E. From the conciliation of the above divorce case, B removed the apartment of this case from April 1, 2014, and the Defendant and B’s active and passive property are determined to be fully reverted to each other as their names.
According to the conciliation of the above divorce case, the apartment of this case is finally reverted to the defendant.
[Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and Eul Nos. 2 through 2.