beta
(영문) 대전지방법원서산지원 2014.10.07 2013가단1305

대여금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 25,200,000 as well as 5% per annum from August 10, 2003 to January 14, 2013 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Defendant, as of January 9, 2003, prepared a promissory note with a face value of KRW 25.2 million (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) with the payment date as of August 9, 2003, and issued to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 3, purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay at the rate of 5% per annum from August 10, 2003 to January 14, 2013, the delivery date of the original copy of the instant payment order, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense, etc.

A. The summary of the defendant's defense, etc., borrowed from the plaintiff's mother non-party C the amount of KRW 10 million on October 19, 1994, and KRW 20 million on February 23, 1995, and made and delivered each promissory note to the deceased's husband D.

On November 8, 1996, the defendant repaid the principal and interest of each of the above loans to C on behalf of C, and at this time, the plaintiff made a receipt (Evidence No. 2) stating that the balance of the debt remaining after the plaintiff paid to C is KRW 4.4 million to the defendant on behalf of C, and both copies of promissory notes were returned to the defendant.

However, the Plaintiff still held a 10 million won promissory note, and accordingly, the Plaintiff forced the Defendant to repay the principal and interest thereof again.

On January 9, 2013, the Defendant drafted the Promissory Notes with the purport that the Plaintiff would pay KRW 25,200,000 to the Plaintiff as the sum of the Plaintiff’s KRW 10,000 and interest thereon. If the Defendant finds a receipt, which is the evidence of payment, the Promissory Notes are null and void, and thereafter, the Defendant would not pay the Promissory Notes up to KRW 30,000 borrowed on 198.

Therefore, the defendant is not obligated to pay the money claimed by the plaintiff.

(b) unfair;