대여금
1. The Defendant amounting to KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s 24% per annum from April 9, 2015 to June 3, 2016.
On February 28, 2015, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 20 million to the Defendant, which was set at 24% per annum after the due date for payment on February 28, 2015, and KRW 10 million per annum after the due date for payment on April 8, 2015, which was set at 24% per annum after the due date for payment on April 8, 2015.
Although the defendant revoked at the second date for pleading, it is insufficient to prove that the confession was contrary to the truth or due to mistake only with the evidence No. 1, and there is no other evidence to support this, and thus there is no effect of revocation of confession by the defendant.
In the same purport, it is difficult to accept the Defendant’s assertion that the money received from the Plaintiff is a nominal refund of the subcontract brokerage fee, and since the first date for pleading.
Therefore, as the Plaintiff seeks, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the agreed interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 24% per annum from April 9, 2015 to June 3, 2016, which was served on the Defendant with a copy of the complaint from April 9, 2015, and the delay damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is wholly accepted.