beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.21 2013가단5178312

신용카드이용대금

Text

1. According to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff)’s primary counterclaim, the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff). 18,000.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On January 23, 2007, the Defendant entered into a credit card use agreement with the Plaintiff and was issued the KB National Card (hereinafter “instant credit card”).

B. The director of the Plaintiff’s credit transaction division and the director of the special bond ledger include the following:

(1) The national card transfer loan of March 2, 201 (the maturity date: March 22, 2014; interest rate of KRW 13.9%): The unpaid principal and KRW 3,066,677; and interest rate of KRW 206,069 were incorporated into special bonds on September 27, 2012 (the management of defective bonds arising from the delayed payment, etc.; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the interest rate of KRW 865,466 as of December 2, 2013 (the interest rate of KRW 23.9% per annum shall apply to special bonds; hereinafter the same shall apply).

D. 3.4 million won (the first 2. July 22, 2012, interest rate of 18.9%): The unpaid principal and interest of 618,190 won and interest of 49,415 won were incorporated into a special bond on September 27, 2012, and the interest accrued after the incorporation of the special bond is KRW 174,463 as of December 2, 2013.

⑶ 물품 및 용역대금 : 미변제 원금 18,521,727원과 이자 1,941,982원이 2012. 12. 29. 특수채권으로 편입되었고, 특수채권 폅입 후 발생이자는 2013. 12. 2. 현재 4,111,366원이다.

【Facts without dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidences 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the assertion

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant had a duty to pay damages for delay of KRW 29,55,355 (= KRW 3,066,677 KRW 206,679 KRW 865,469 KRW 618,190 KRW 49,415 KRW 174,463 KRW 18,521,727 KRW 18,941,982 KRW 4,111,366) and 22,206,594 among them (= KRW 3,066,67 KRW 618,190 KRW 18,521,727).

In this regard, the defendant, after having received the credit card in this case with no remaining credit card from the plaintiff, visited the business point of the national bank and restored the credit card limit in an irregular manner, and the defendant on December 201.