대여금
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
purport.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case written by the court of first instance as stated in paragraph (2). Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the
(However, the part concerning co-defendant B of the first instance court, which was separately determined, and the part concerning statutory interest not belonging to the scope of the trial in this Court, are excluded); 2. The part which was dried
A. On the third page of the judgment of the court of first instance, “D store E” was added to “F store G”, and on the fourth page “D” was added to “the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to reverse the above recognition.”
B. Nos. 5 through 14 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be conducted as follows.
3) Meanwhile, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 83,647,80,00 and damages for delay, which applied the base rate for the sale and purchase of the relevant product as of July 9, 2009, which was the date of payment of KRW 330,00.
In light of the purport of Articles 378 and 377(2) of the Civil Act, where an obligor pays foreign currency claims which are foreign currency claims designated in a foreign currency in Korean currency, it is reasonable to say that the time of conversion should be paid in Korean currency converted by the foreign exchange price at the time of actual performance, i.e., when the performance of the obligation is not the due date but the actual performance.
Therefore, even in cases where a creditor claims the above foreign currency claim by exercising the right to substitute payment, and converting it into Korean currency, the court shall order the performance of the amount converted into Korean currency based on the foreign exchange market price at the time of closing argument of the fact-finding court, based on the conversion into Korean currency, within the scope of the amount claimed by the Plaintiff. < Amended by Act No. 11483, Dec. 1, 2012>