Love to find a girlfriend 165 times a year, is it love for love or borrowing?

One year in love, looking for a girlfriend for 165 times, the cumulative amount of more than 60,000 yuan. After the breakup, the man refused to repay the love fee, and the two sides appealed to the court. On July 12, Yuan Yongjun, president of the Second court of the Caidian District Court of Wuhan City, was a live broadcast room of the Yangtze River Daily's "Tuesday". He revealed that the court judged the case according to the two online chat records.

One year in love, 165 times to find a girlfriend for finding a girlfriend

On October 27, 2021, the Caidian District Court accepted a civil loan dispute. The plaintiff Ms. Zhu claimed that from June 2015 to October 2016, Zhang asked him to borrow more than 60,000 yuan. In 2021, Zhang made up for the borrowing, hoping that the other party would return the interest.

In this regard, Zhang said that the so -called borrowing was a ghost. They were classmates. From June 2015 to October 2016, they were in love. They all had transfer of money to each other. As for who gave it, who would be clear during love? Later, the rendering of the supplement was that Ms. Zhu asked her mother to ask for money. Ms. Zhu did not transfer to him 60,000 yuan on the same day, so the IOU was not established. The two broke up in 2016 and did not contact them for 5 years. Ms. Zhu asked for compensation. He was only willing to give it 10,000 yuan.

After investigation, after Zhang wrote a debit, Ms. Zhu did not pay for Zhang, but from June 2015 to October 2016, Ms. Zhu should ask Zhang to transfer it 165 times to him and his friends. A total of more than 60,000 yuan. During this period, Zhang transferred to Ms. Zhu 6 times, a total of more than a thousand yuan.

60,000 have not been repaid, and coax 750 yuan

Is this money borrowing or a love fee? In order to prove her statement, Ms. Zhu provided the court with a WeChat chat history of the two.

In 2021, Ms. Zhu asked Zhang to pay back the money through WeChat. On March 9 of that year, she sent a statistical debate bill to Zhang through WeChat, and made it clear about a total of more than 60,000 yuan, and there was a chat record as evidence. But Zhang said that the overhead of falling in love could not bear him alone, he had to count it.

Two months later, since Zhang, the Han Dynasty discussed the money and returned Ms. Zhu to borrow 400 yuan. Soon, Zhang asked Ms. Zhu to borrow 350 yuan for the same reason. Ms. Zhu asked him to pay back the money first, and Zhang said that he could pay back the money and lent him the money first. Ms. Zhu helplessly in the hands of her mother, she needed to exchange it with a debit exchange to let Zhang write down a 60,000 yuan debit, and lent him 350 yuan.

A week later, Ms. Zhu took the IOU to find Zhang to pay back the money, and Zhang changed his mouth to say "there is money to pay back", and then there was no following. Ms. Zhu had to sue to the court.

"5.20", "13.14" transfer is not borrowed

The court tried that Ms. Zhu transferred to Zhang 6 years ago. In 2021, Zhang issued a debit for this. While Ms. Zhu repeatedly asked Zhang to borrow from WeChat and Alipay, and sent a screenshot of the transfer record to Zhang, Zhang issued a debit to Ms. Zhu, and sent the debit and ID card to Ms. Zhu. Ms. Zhu's chat history made "How many years? Ten thousand a year is over" "Let me go back to Wuhan to meet the accounts", "I can write it for you, what's the problem", "I won't no, I won't not be able It should be acknowledged that "means that Zhang should be regarded as Zhang's claims -the two parties' previous funds have been recognized.

Although Zhang claimed that these money was used for the love expenses of the two, there was no sufficient evidence to prove it.

In the WeChat and Alipay transfer, there are 4 record belts with "5.20", "13.14", and other obvious symbolic transfers. When Ms. Zhu did not provide evidence to confirm the loan, the relationship between the two sides of the department and the friend's relationship between the male and female friends. This Four transfers, the court did not identify it as a loan and removed from the loan. Accordingly, the defendant Zhang should return the principal and interest of Ms. Zhu for a total of more than 60,000 yuan.

Zhang did not accept an appeal to the Wuhan Intermediate People's Court. On June 2, 2022, the Wuhan Intermediate People's Court rejected the appeal and maintained the original sentence.

In the live broadcast, Judge Yuan Yongjun told the participating netizens that the case gave everyone two warnings:

Money can't change love. Do not solve the so -called breakup and compensation fees with private loans.

No matter how good the relationship is, the borrowing must be left. The relationship between couples is not the identity relationship stipulated in the law. Both brothers need to calculate accounts, not to mention couples. When the couple encountered difficulties, a debit should not be the line of emotion. On the contrary, it was the embodiment of their respective independent personality, and it was also a testimony of this friendship.

(Changjiang Daily reporter Chen Yong correspondent Li Jinxing Liu Hui)

【Edit: Zheng Xiaoxiao】

For more exciting content, please download the "Da Wuhan" client in the major application markets.

- END -