Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 3,885,887 and KRW 2,783,39 among them, from April 14, 2014 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the statements and arguments set forth in Gap 1, 2, 3, and 5 and the entire purport of the arguments, Cho Credy Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Mediation”) may recognize on March 30, 2012 that on March 30, 2012, the defendant lent to the defendant 3,00,000 won per annum, interest rate of 39% per annum, interest rate of 39% per annum, interest rate of 39% per annum, due date for repayment, and March 30, 2015. The Cho Credy transferred the above principal and interest claim against the defendant on June 1, 2013 to the plaintiff on March 31, 2014 and notified the defendant of the above assignment of the credit. The defendant can be found to have not repaid the remaining principal and interest of the loan (=2,783,39 won, interest and delay damages).
According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff, a transferee, 2,783,39 won of the above principal and interest of loan and remaining principal of loan 2,783,39 won, as claimed by the Plaintiff, at the rate of 17% per annum as claimed by the Plaintiff from April 14, 2014 to the date of full payment.
2. The plaintiff asserts as to the remainder of claims as shown in the annexed sheet.
(E) According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the entry of a credit card member agreement with the defendant, and failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the entry of a credit card member agreement with the defendant, as otherwise alleged by the plaintiff. The court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to the entry of a credit card member agreement.
3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is accepted within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as there is no ground for appeal.