beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 25,465,00 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from July 21, 2015 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On February 8, 2010, the Daejeon Agricultural Cooperative entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant with regard to the lease deposit of KRW 15,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 1,500,000 (including additional tax) and the lease term of KRW 1,50,000 (including rent of KRW 1,50,000) with respect to the lease deposit of KRW 320,00 square meters (hereinafter “the Taekwondo hall in this case”) located in Dong-gu, Daejeon for the purpose of operating the Taekwondo hall. On October 18, 2012, the lease agreement was renewed by setting the lease term as between March 2, 2010 and April 2, 2012.
B. On June 19, 2012, the Plaintiff granted a loan of KRW 5,00,000 to the Defendant (Evidence 1) and a certificate of confirmation (Evidence 4,465,000 to the Defendant on October 18, 2012) that lent KRW 14,465,00 to the Defendant at 30% of the interest rate.
C. On September 27, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 6,000,00 to the Defendant.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 7, Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion related to the lending of the party and the determination thereof
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff loaned KRW 25,465,00 to the Defendant, respectively, KRW 14,465,00 on June 19, 2012, KRW 14,465,00 on October 18, 2012, and KRW 6,000 on September 27, 2013.
B. Defendant’s assertion 1) The fact that the Defendant borrowed KRW 5,00,000 from the Plaintiff is acknowledged. However, ① 14,465,00 won was married with the Defendant on March 14, 2014, when the Plaintiff had agreed that the Plaintiff would jointly bear the monthly rent of the above Taekwondo place while operating the above Taekwondo place on July 2013. (ii) The Plaintiff married with the Defendant on March 14, 2014.
C. Each of the above evidence, Gap evidence, Eul evidence Nos. 5, 6, and Eul evidence Nos. 3 are as follows, which are acknowledged as being comprehensively based on the overall purport of the pleadings. In other words, ① The plaintiff is the defendant 5,00,000 won on June 19, 2012, and the plaintiff is the defendant.