대여금
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.
1. According to the records on the legitimacy of the appeal for subsequent completion, the defendant's appeal for subsequent completion is lawful, since it is recognized that the documents of lawsuit, including a duplicate of the complaint of the first instance, and the original copy of the judgment, were served to the defendant by means of service by public notice, and the defendant was not aware of the fact that the lawsuit of this case and the judgment of the court of first instance were submitted within two weeks after becoming aware of such fact.
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. 1) On January 22, 2009, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant at an interest rate of KRW 3% per month and due date of payment on March 22, 2009 (hereinafter “the first loan”).
(2) On August 27, 2009, the Plaintiff paid KRW 22,620,000 after deducting KRW 7,380,000 as interest, and paid KRW 22,620,00 to the Defendant on October 31, 2009 (hereinafter “the second loan”) with the interest rate of KRW 30,000 per month and due date of repayment as of October 31, 2009 (hereinafter “the second loan”). The Plaintiff deducted KRW 7,380,000 from the Plaintiff’s deduction while making the first loan of this case pursuant to Article 4(1) of the Interest Limitation Act, and KRW 3,60,000,000 after deducting the second loan of this case as the interest rate of KRW 3,60,00.
In regard to this, the plaintiff argued that there is a balance in the loans made to the defendant prior to the second lending of this case, and that the above balance is included in the loans of this case 1 and 2, and that the amount remaining after deducting the above balance is paid to the defendant, and that it does not be deducted from the interest. However, the statement of the evidence No. 3 alone is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, the plaintiff's above assertion is not accepted.
16,400,000 won was deducted.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. The Plaintiff, which caused the Plaintiff’s claim, set forth KRW 30,000,00 on January 22, 2009, and lent KRW 20,000 on August 27, 2009 to the Defendant at the rate of KRW 3% per month.
Therefore, the defendant is the sum of the above loans to the plaintiff.