채무인수금
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 40,143,830 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from April 12, 2016 to the date of full payment.
1. Basic facts (applicable for recognition: Fact that there is no dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 and 14, and purport of the whole pleadings);
A. The Plaintiff leased the Defendant’s husband C with interest rate of KRW 10% per annum on June 3, 2008, and the due date of repayment on August 3, 2008. ② On September 19, 2012, the Plaintiff determined and lent the Defendant’s husband C with interest rate of KRW 10% per annum, and the due date of repayment on November 15, 2012.
B. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Suwon District Court for a payment order for the said loan with the Suwon District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Order 2013 tea1687, and on April 22, 2013, the said court ordered the Plaintiff to pay 10% per annum for KRW 30 million and KRW 25 million from June 3, 2008 to the date of service of the original copy of each payment order and KRW 5 million from September 19, 2012 to the date of service of the original copy of each payment order. The said payment order was served to C on April 25, 2013, and it was finalized as it is on May 10, 2013.
C. On March 31, 2014, the Plaintiff received reimbursement of KRW 10 million out of the above borrowed money from C.
On August 26, 2016, the Plaintiff received reimbursement of KRW 10 million out of the above borrowed money from C.
2. Judgment on the main claim
A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant has a duty to repay C's loans under the above payment order, since he/she acquired C's debt against C concurrently.
B. No. 2 (A) which is evidence that conforms to the facts of the conclusion of the overlapping assumption of obligation, has no dispute between the parties that the seal affixed after the defendant's name was affixed with the seal of the defendant. Thus, the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to be established, since there is no evidence between the parties that the seal affixed after the defendant's name was affixed with the seal of the defendant, and the defendant's seal affixed at will by C, but there is no evidence to prove the fact that the seal affixed by C is affixed with the seal, and the defense
Rather, according to Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the defendant, on December 28, 2008, is 344m2 and 344m2.