logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.09.06 2018가단103351
대여금
Text

1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 50,000,000 and 30% per annum from August 14, 2013 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 2012, the Plaintiff lent KRW 50 million to Defendant B.

B. On June 3, 2013, Defendant B agreed to the Plaintiff as the first day of each month from July 1, 2013, respectively, by the due date until December 1, 2013, by 30% per annum, interest and delay damages, and interest payment dates.

As to the terms of the above agreement, the Plaintiff and Defendant B drafted a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement as a notary public No. 429, which is a law firm, in 2013.

C. On July 17, 2013, Defendant C, the births of Defendant B, agreed that Defendant B would pay on his behalf, if Defendant B could not repay the above loan obligations against the Plaintiff.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleading

2. According to the facts of the Defendants’ aforementioned recognition of the loan obligations, Defendant B is the primary debtor. Defendant C, as a joint and several surety, has the obligation to pay to the Plaintiff the agreed interest and delay damages calculated at the rate of 30% per annum from August 14, 2013 to the date of full payment as the interest payment under the above agreement, which is calculated at the rate of 50 million won and the interest rate of 30% per annum as requested by the Plaintiff.

3. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. Defendant B’s assertion that the Defendants received KRW 3,940,000 from the Plaintiff as the primary investment money on March 9, 2012, and KRW 17,00,000 from the second investment money on November 27, 2012, and made a notarial deed on KRW 50,000 by coercion even if the Plaintiff did not borrow money, and paid money from the Plaintiff as the dividend or interest.

B. However, since there is no evidence to prove the above facts of the defendants' assertion, the above assertion is rejected.

4. The plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating Justices.

arrow