beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.01.27 2015가단5070832

청구이의

Text

1. The defendant's law firm Korea-style Law Firm No. 663, 2013, drawn up on October 29, 2013 by the defendant's notary public against the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. In early 2013, the Defendant became aware of the Plaintiff that it was scheduled to conduct the “Drenjing Business” business through the Defendant’s Hamman Hamman C, and subsequently transferred KRW 2,00,000 to the E head of the Tong designated by the Plaintiff on April 25, 2013 upon receiving a request for monetary loan from the Plaintiff, and again, transferred KRW 2,70,000 to the E head of the Tong on April 26, 2013 upon receiving an additional loan request from the Plaintiff.

B. In addition, on April 29, 2013, the Defendant entered into a joint and several surety agreement with the Lridco on the Plaintiff’s loan of KRW 10,000,000 (interest rate of KRW 39% per annum, and April 29, 2018) to the Lridco Ltd. (hereinafter “Lridco”).

C. On May 1, 2013, upon receiving the Plaintiff’s request for a loan, the Defendant took out a loan of KRW 25,000,000 (interest rate of KRW 39.5% per annum) from several loan companies introduced by the Plaintiff and lent it to the Plaintiff. In light of the above paragraphs (a) and (b) transactional relationship, the Defendant was prepared with the Plaintiff’s loan certificates (hereinafter “the instant loan certificates”) with “45,00,000 won per annum, monthly interest rate of KRW 25,00,000, and October 25, 2013.”

On the other hand, the Plaintiff borrowed the above KRW 25,00,000 from the Defendant on the same day, and paid KRW 2,500,000 to the Defendant, and thereafter, paid KRW 12,90,000 in total to the Defendant from May 26, 2013 to October 26, 2013 as interest, and the Defendant additionally lent KRW 368,000 to the Plaintiff on October 8, 2013.

After the maturity date of the instant loan certificate, the Defendant was unable to collect the loan from the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant urged the Plaintiff to repay the loan. Accordingly, on October 29, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant reduced the existing interest by 7% per month in consideration of the existing financial relationship, etc., and set up a notarial deed with the following contents adjusted (hereinafter “notarial deed”).

The creditor (referred to the defendant) of Article 1 (Purpose) of the Notarial Deed of a Money Loan Agreement shall be KRW 30,000,000 on May 1, 2013.