beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.06 2017나31776

양수금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. On June 27, 2014, the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) the Defendant entered into a loan transaction agreement with a social loan company (a mutual loan company E&P takes place before the change (hereinafter “A&P loan”) for the lending limit of KRW 10,000,000; (b) June 27, 2017; (c) the interest rate on loans and delay rate of KRW 34.9% per annum; and (d) the lending transaction agreement for the minimum principal repayment method (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”); and (e) obtained a loan of KRW 10,000,000 on the same day.

Since then, the defendant repeats several loans and additional loans in accordance with the above loan agreement.

From August 29, 2015, the repayment of principal was in arrears.

On November 30, 2015, Apropy social loans transferred the above loans to the Plaintiff and notified the Defendant of the transfer of the credits.

In August 28, 2015, the outstanding principal under the above loan contract is KRW 9,536,517.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the above KRW 9,536,517 and damages for delay to the plaintiff as the transferee of the above loan claim.

2. The Plaintiff asserts that a social loan created by Apropha concluded a loan transaction agreement with the Defendant and made several occasions of loan transactions. However, the evidence No. 1 (a loan transaction agreement) cannot be used as evidence because there is no evidence to prove the authenticity of a loan transaction agreement, and it is not sufficient to recognize it only by the statement of evidence No. 2 and No. 5, and there is no other evidence to prove it otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit without further review as to the remaining points.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.