beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.25 2016가합2357

전부금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 306,922,295 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from October 28, 2010 to October 25, 2016.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On May 13, 2010, the Defendant: (a) lent KRW 2.2 billion at the interest rate of 36% per annum; (b) 46% per annum; and (c) 2.2 billion won per annum with maturity on August 2, 2010 (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”); and (d) issued one cashier’s checks at the face value of KRW 177,920,000 per annum for interest accrued from May 14, 2010 to August 2, 2010 for the principal amount of KRW 2.2 billion on the same day (i.e., loans KRW 2., KRW 36 million x annual interest rate of KRW 36% x 82/365 x 1,000 per annum).

B. C repaid to the Defendant a total of KRW 1.25 billion on August 2, 2010, KRW 100 million on August 3, 2010, KRW 200 million on August 13, 2010, KRW 200 million on August 13, 2010, KRW 23.5 billion on August 23, 2010, KRW 250 million on August 24, 2010, and KRW 1.25 billion on October 28, 2010, KRW D paid to the Defendant KRW 1,086,56,386 on October 28, 2010.

C. On September 3, 2015, based on the executory exemplification of the payment order (Seoul Central District Court 2012 tea6258) issued against C, the Plaintiff filed an attachment and assignment order against C, which was issued on September 7, 2015, and the instant assignment order was served on the Defendant on September 10, 2015, and on September 28, 2016, on the ground that C and the Defendant received a statutory limit from C under a monetary loan loan contract between C and the Defendant, and C and the third obligor as the Defendant, and the Defendant filed an attachment and assignment order against C, which was issued on September 7, 2015 (hereinafter “instant assignment order”). The instant assignment order was served on the Defendant on September 10, 2015 and on January 28, 2016, and became final and conclusive on February 5, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap's statements in Gap's Evidence Nos. 1, 4 and 9 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. At the time of the instant loan agreement, Plaintiff C paid 400 million won in advance to the Defendant under the name of advance interest and loan commission. The actual amount of C’s loan (=2.2 billion won - 400 million won) is merely 1.8 billion won.

Nevertheless, C is based on the premise that the principal of the instant loan agreement is KRW 2.2 billion, from May 13, 2010 to May 2010.