양수금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. Basic facts
A. On April 26, 2002, the Defendant obtained the card loan of KRW 4,300,000 from Samsung Capital Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “ Samsung Capital”), and received the card loan of KRW 4,300,000.
B. Samsung Capital filed a lawsuit against the defendant for the repayment of the loan of this case (U.S. District Court 2004Gaga3603) and received a judgment on April 22, 2004 that "the defendant shall pay to Samsung Capital KRW 3,265,612 and its delay damages." The above judgment became final and conclusive on June 15, 2004.
C. Around February 2004, Samsung Capital was merged with Samsung Card Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Samsung Card”), and the Defendant (the name was changed from the Credit Counseling and Recovery Fund Co., Ltd. on March 26, 2013 to the National D&C Fund) received the instant loan claim from Samsung Card on December 12, 2008, and notified the Defendant of the said transfer on March 23, 2009.
The claim of this case is the total of KRW 5,928,686,701 as of March 12, 2014, including principal KRW 2,768,015 and interest KRW 5,928,686.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff delay damages calculated at the rate of 17% per annum from March 13, 2014 to the date of full payment with respect to KRW 8,696,701 and the principal amount of KRW 2,768,015 among them.
3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant paid KRW 5,887,715 to Samsung Capital on June 26, 2003, thereby repaying the entire obligation of the instant loan.
According to the evidence Nos. 2-1 and 2-2, the Defendant transferred KRW 5,887,715 on June 26, 2003 (=350,194 Won 5,537,521), and it can be acknowledged that the remittance details are written in Samsung Capital and Samsung Card.
However, according to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 7 through 13, the defendant's objection.