대여금
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 50,000,000 and its amount from July 1, 2010.
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 1 (each of the above written statements, the defendant asserted that the above written statement was made by deception of the plaintiff, but no evidence exists to acknowledge it), the defendant may recognize the fact that on February 10, 2010, the defendant prepared and delivered a written confirmation with the following contents to the plaintiff.
① The Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant the sum of KRW 50 million on Jan. 21, 2008 and Jan. 25, 2008 with the funds, etc. for establishing a domestic corporation of French Orspa beverages. As the establishment of the said corporation was delayed, the Defendant returned KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff by the end of October 2008 and paid KRW 2 million each month as interest. However, the Defendant failed to implement the said promise.
② As of January 31, 2010, the Defendant confirmed that the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the principal amount of KRW 50 million and interest for arrears of KRW 9850,000 as of January 31, 201, and in order to pay the principal and interest for delay, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 5,50,000 (50,000 for principal and interest for delay, KRW 50,000 for interest, KRW 50,000 for interest and interest for delay) from March 18, 2010 to the Plaintiff, and shall also pay from March 18, 2010 for interest and interest rate of KRW 50,000 for principal.
(hereinafter “instant agreement”). B.
According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 30% per annum [the maximum interest rate under the former Interest Limitation Act (wholly amended by Act No. 12227, Jan. 14, 2014)] from July 1, 2010 to the date of full payment as the plaintiff seeks from July 1, 2010 to the date of full payment pursuant to the agreement of this case.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The defendant asserts to the following purport.
The Plaintiff invested KRW 50 million in F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “F”) operated by the Defendant.
However, F. F. the Plaintiff on 208.