대여금
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.
The defendant.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On April 1, 1993, the Plaintiff lent KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant loan”) without setting the due date and interest.
B. From October 2016 to October 2017, the Defendant repaid to the Plaintiff KRW 1,200,000, in total, KRW 100,000,000.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 28,800,000,000, which was already repaid out of KRW 30,000,000, barring special circumstances.
B. The Defendant asserted that the statute of limitations expired since the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit after the lapse of 10 years from the date on which the loan certificate was prepared, the Defendant asserts that the statute of limitations expired.
The statute of limitations proceeds from the time when a right can be exercised (Article 166(1) of the Civil Act), and in the case of a right which does not set the time limit, the right holder can file a claim at any time, so the starting point of the statute of limitations is the time when the right has occurred. As seen earlier, the fact that the plaintiff lent the loan of this case to the defendant on April 1, 1993 without setting the time limit for payment is the same, and the fact that the plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case on December 28, 2017, which is ten years after the lapse of the time limit for payment, is obvious
I would like to say.
In regard to this, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant renounced the benefit of extinctive prescription by repaying KRW 1,200,000 after the expiration of the extinctive prescription period. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant renounced the benefit of extinctive prescription due to the Defendant’s repayment of KRW 1,20,000 after the expiration of the extinctive prescription period should be deemed to have impliedly approved the entire amount of the obligation, unless there is any dispute as to the partial repayment of the obligation after the completion of the extinctive prescription. In this case,