beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.07.07 2015나67481

양수금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant’s KRW 12,121,544 among the Plaintiff and KRW 5,768,814 among the Plaintiff, on April 11, 2015.

Reasons

1. According to the determination on the cause of the claim, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, the assignee of the loan principal and interest, the total sum of KRW 12,121,544 and delay damages for the principal amount of KRW 5,768,814.

On June 22, 2002, the Defendant entered into an agreement with Hyundai Card and obtained a credit card from Hyundai Card and used it.

B. The Hyundai Card transferred the credit card payment claim against the Defendant to Hyundai Capital, and Hyundai Capital again transferred the credit card payment claim (hereinafter “instant claim”) to the Plaintiff on July 1, 2010.

On December 3, 2010, the Plaintiff was delegated with the authority to notify the assignment of claims from Hyundai Capital, and sent a notice of assignment to the Defendant by content-certified mail, and the notice of assignment of claims reached the Defendant around that time.

C. Meanwhile, as of April 10, 2015, the sum of the principal and interest of the instant claim is KRW 12,121,544 (= Principal KRW 5,768,814 or delay damages KRW 6,352,730). The overdue interest rate determined by the Plaintiff within the scope of the overdue interest rate of the instant claim is 17% per annum.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the conclusion, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 17% per annum from April 11, 2015 to the date of full payment, which the Plaintiff seeks from the date of acquisition of the Plaintiff’s claim, with respect to KRW 12,121,54 and the principal amount of KRW 5,768,814.

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted on the ground of its reasoning, and since the judgment of the first instance is unfair on the ground of its conclusion, the plaintiff's appeal shall be accepted, and the defendant shall be revoked and the payment of the above money shall