beta
(영문) 수원지방법원안양지원 2020.11.20 2020가단120774

양수금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 161,342,273 and the amount of KRW 44,31,437 from April 10, 202 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant prepared a loan agreement with D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”) on the terms of lending (hereinafter referred to as “the instant loan agreement”) with the content that the ENs vehicles (hereinafter referred to as “the instant vehicle”) receive the instant loan (hereinafter referred to as “the instant loan agreement”) by setting 49 million won at 36 months of the loan period, interest rate of 26% per annum, interest rate of 26% per annum, and overdue interest rate of 29%.

B. The instant loan claims against D against the Defendant were assigned in sequence to F limited liability companies on May 20, 2016, and to the Plaintiff on June 20, 2019.

C. As of April 9, 2020, the amount of principal and interest of the instant loan claims as of April 9, 202 is KRW 44,331,437, interest 117,010,836.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the principal and interest of the instant loan claim amounting to KRW 161,342,273 (= KRW 44,331,437, KRW 117,010,836) and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 27.9% per annum from April 10, 2020 to the date of full payment.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the loan agreement of this case was cancelled in accordance with Article 110(2) of the Civil Act, by asserting that he was deceiving from G and H and drafted the instant loan agreement with D.

However, in the event that a third party made a fraud or coercion with respect to the declaration of intent of the other party, such declaration of intent may be revoked only if the other party knew or could have known such fact (Article 110(2) of the Civil Act). In order to revoke the agreement on the loan of this case on the ground that the Defendant made a loan agreement by G and H deception, not only the fact that the agreement on the loan of this case was made by G and H deception, but also D knew or could have known such fact.