대여금
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 162,806,214 won and 34,831,289 won among them, from September 1, 2016 to the day of full payment.
1. There is no dispute between the parties to the determination as to the cause of the claim, or comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as to the entries in the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the Plaintiff may recognize the fact that on July 6, 1994, the Plaintiff loaned 60 million won to the Defendant on July 6, 1994, the expiration date of the loan, the interest rate of 12% per annum, the maximum damages rate of 19% per annum (the loans in general (the loans in general), the Defendant delayed the repayment of the above loans and interest from December 26, 202, and the outstanding principal and interest of 34,831,289 won is outstanding, and the total principal and interest of the loan is 162,806,214 respectively.
According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 162,806,214 won in total of the principal and interest outstanding to the plaintiff and 34,831,289 won in principal, and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 18% per annum, which is the rate of damages for delay, from September 1, 2016 to the date of full payment, from September 1, 2016 to the date of full payment.
(hereinafter “instant loan claim”). 2. Determination on the statute of limitations defense
A. The defendant set up a defense that the plaintiff's loan claim of this case had expired due to the completion of prescription.
B. It is evident that the instant lawsuit was filed on October 10, 201 after the ten-year extinctive prescription period from December 25, 2002, which was the date of the final payment of interest on the instant loan bonds, was expired.
C. As to this, the Plaintiff re-appealed that the extinctive prescription of the instant loan claim was suspended due to the participation in the bankruptcy proceedings against the Defendant.
According to Article 32 subparagraph 2 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act and Article 171 of the Civil Act, it is evident that participation in bankruptcy proceedings has a reason to discontinue extinctive prescription.
In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 3-1 and No. 3-2, the defendant filed a petition for bankruptcy with the Seoul Central District Court No. 2007Hadan48170, and the plaintiff in the above case shall participate in the distribution of dividends to the foundation.