beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.05.24 2015가단33509

대여금

Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from December 9, 2015 to the date of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. Since there is no dispute between the parties that the Plaintiff lent KRW 30,00,000 to the Defendant in June 2, 2009 (hereinafter “instant loan”), the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 30,000,000 and the damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum as stipulated by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the date following the delivery date of a copy of the instant complaint to the date of full payment, barring any special circumstance.

B. However, as the provisions on statutory interest rate (Presidential Decree) under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings were promulgated on September 25, 2015 and enforced on October 1, 2015, only damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from October 1, 2015 pursuant to Article 2(2) of the Addenda (Presidential Decree No. 26553) of the same Act can be claimed, and there is no reason for the exceeding part.

2. Judgment on the defense

A. The Defendant sought that “the Plaintiff received the instant loan from C” from C and paid KRW 20,00,000 to C several times from November 14, 201 to May 31, 2012, and that “the Plaintiff would have received the instant loan on his/her own,” and asserts that “the Plaintiff would have received the instant loan on his/her own,” and that the Defendant repaid all the instant loan by sending KRW 10,000,000 to the Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of E designated by D during several times from October 26 to October 30, 2012.

B. First, if C and D are authorized to receive the instant loan from the Defendant, there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

(O) In light of the above, the Plaintiff directly appeared on the second date for pleading, and argued that “A, D, etc. did not receive the instant loan from the Defendant.”

Ultimately, the defendant's defense is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit.