기타(금전)
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
3.The reduction of claims by this Court.
1. According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1-6, Eul evidence No. 6, 8-10 and all pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff was employed by entering the company's trade name "C" operated by the defendant on January 7, 2016, and the plaintiff lent KRW 7,000,000 to the defendant on January 15, 2016 as interest monthly 2%, and the defendant was unable to pay wages, and the plaintiff and the defendant received a loan from Hyundai Capital Capital under the plaintiff's name and paid it on behalf of the head of D division who is the plaintiff and the employees of the above company. Accordingly, it is recognized that the plaintiff was able to pay the principal and interest of the loan, setting KRW 5,00,000 as interest per annum 26.9% on February 3, 2016 and used it as the plaintiff and the head of D division's monthly income.
The Plaintiff received 6,000,000 won out of the above loans 7,000,000 won from the Defendant three times more, and received 1,780,000 won out of the above loans 5,000,000 won over two times, and appropriated all of the above loans for principal amounting to 1,00,000 won (=7,000,000-6,000 won). The Plaintiff is a person who is the principal amounting to 3,220,00 won (=5,000,000-1,780,000 won).
According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the interest and delay damages calculated at the rate of 25% per annum as claimed by the plaintiff within the above loan interest rate of 24% per annum from January 15, 2016 to the date of full payment, with respect to the amount of KRW 1,220,000 (=1,000,000 won) and KRW 1,000,000,000, which is the loan day, from January 15, 2016 to the date of full payment. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 23570, Feb. 3, 2016>
2. The defendant's assertion that the defendant paid the above loans of KRW 7,00,000 to the defendant, and Hyundai Capital loans of KRW 7,00 to the plaintiff was responsible for the defendant by deceiving the defendant that the plaintiff would work very significantly in the company, and as long as the plaintiff did not work properly, the defendant is responsible for paying the loans.