beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.01 2014가합594562

양수금

Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff for KRW 629,94,576 and KRW 263,973,01 among them. < Amended by Act No. 1309, Jan. 1, 2015>

Reasons

1. Determination as to the plaintiff's successor's claim

A. Under the joint and several guarantee of Defendant B, C, and D on July 23, 2007, Defendant A Co., Ltd. borrowed KRW 352,00,000 in total on four occasions by 88,000 from JBF Capital Co., Ltd. (the trade name before the change: us Capital Co., Ltd.) for a loan period of KRW 63 months, interest rate of 11.21%, and overdue interest rate of KRW 24%.

(2) On December 27, 2013, JBour Capital Co., Ltd. transferred the above loan claims to the Plaintiff, and the assignment of claims to Defendant A was made at that time.

(3) On December 12, 2014, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor, while proceeding in the instant lawsuit, received the above loan claims under a contract for the transfer and takeover of claims concluded with the Plaintiff, and notified Defendant A of the transfer of claims around January 20, 2015.

(4) As of December 31, 2014, the principal and interest of loans as of December 31, 2014, are KRW 263,973,01, interest 365,687,912, legal expenses 333,653, and KRW 629,94,576.

[Ground of recognition] For Defendant D: (a) facts without dispute; (b) evidence Nos. 1 through 4; (c) evidence Nos. 1 to 1; (d) the purport of the entire pleadings; and (c) Defendant A, B, and C: Service by public notice (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act)

B. According to the above facts, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff, the assignee of the above loan claim, 629,94,576 won and the principal of the loan, 263,973,01 won, which is the interest rate of 24% per annum from January 1, 2015 to the date of full payment.

2. After the Plaintiff transferred the above loan claim, which is the object of the lawsuit, to the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor, as set forth in paragraph (1), the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor filed an application for intervention in succession, but the fact that the Plaintiff did not withdraw is apparent in the record without the consent of the Defendants.

In this case, the plaintiff's claim.