대여금
1. The plaintiff's respective claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The Plaintiff loaned KRW 15 million to Defendant B on October 5, 1992, KRW 14 million to Defendant B on October 11, 1993, and KRW 3 million to Defendant C on or around that time (payment period December 30, 1999), respectively, for the business purpose of the Defendants running “D”. Thus, the Defendants are liable to return each of the above loans to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.
As to this, the Defendants asserted that the extinctive prescription of each of the above loans has expired.
Therefore, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as seen earlier, the Defendants borrowed money from the Plaintiff, and then Defendant B repaid part of the principal and interest on loans over several occasions between August 24, 199 and December 17, 2001, and Defendant C repaid one million won out of the principal and interest on loans on February 5, 2003.
Therefore, from October 5, 1992 to October 11, 1999, which was the date of borrowing the Defendants’ respective loans, KRW 15 million, which had not been agreed upon as the due date, among the respective loans, the extinctive prescription period of KRW 3,300,000,000,000,000 from October 5, 1999 to December 30, 1999; and the extinctive prescription period of KRW 3,30,000,00,000, which was the due date from December 30, 1999 to December 17, 2001; Defendant B’s loan repayment obligation from December 17, 2001, which was the date of the final repayment; and Defendant C’s loan repayment obligation from February 5, 2003 to five years again, which was the date of the final repayment, expired after the lapse of the extinctive prescription period of each of the instant lawsuit on February 5, 2008.
As to this, the Plaintiff alleged to the effect that the statute of limitations was suspended by the Defendants’ repayment of part of the above loan by February 26, 2004. However, it is not sufficient to acknowledge only the statement of evidence No. 3-2, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. The Defendants, as alleged by the Plaintiff, partially repaid on February 26, 2004.