대여금
1. Defendant B’s KRW 22,900,000 and its ratio per annum until February 10, 2013 to the Plaintiff.
1. The following facts can be acknowledged in light of the following facts: there is no dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant; or the whole purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3.
Defendant B borrowed KRW 30 million from the Plaintiff on September 9, 2008 as interest rate of KRW 15% per month (payment on September 10), and paid KRW 5 million out of the principal amount on August 8, 2012 to the Plaintiff.
B. After that, Defendant B paid part of the interest and interest on the remainder of the loan to the Plaintiff and remains in KRW 2,90,000 of the borrowed principal as of February 10, 2013.
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. According to the facts of the determination as to the claim portion against Defendant B, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of the principal and interest on loan 22.9 million won and damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum from February 10, 2013 to the full payment date as sought by the Plaintiff.
B. The Plaintiff asserts that Defendant C guaranteed the obligation to return the principal and interest of the loan to the Plaintiff by Defendant C. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the name of Defendant C as indicated in the evidence No. 1 and the subsequent seal affixed thereto were based on the intention of the above Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the joint and several liability of Defendant C as otherwise alleged by the Plaintiff.
Therefore, this part of the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.
3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is justified, and the claim against the defendant C is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.