beta
Text
1. The Defendant: 62,217,978 won to the Plaintiff and 18% per annum from October 1, 2009 to August 13, 2015.
Reasons
1. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim
A. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiff can recognize that on October 1, 2006, the plaintiff lent KRW 67,000,000 to the defendant with interest rate of 18% per annum (1.5% per annum per annum) and payment period of December 31, 2009. Thus, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the above loan of KRW 67,000,000 and interest or delay damages thereon, barring any special circumstance.
B. As to this, the defendant asserted that he paid the plaintiff the above amount of the claim of this case, considering the purport of the entire arguments in the statement in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, it can be acknowledged that the defendant paid part of the amount to the plaintiff as follows, and the result of the appropriation is as follows (the remainder of the amount appropriated for the interest accrued during the period shall be appropriated to the principal), on the other hand, the above evidence alone is insufficient to recognize that the remaining amount of the loan was paid prior to the date of the loan of this case, and there is no other evidence to support this otherwise. Thus, the defendant's argument that the above repayment is reasonable within the scope of the above recognition.
- Repayment of KRW 1,450,00 (interest on October 1, 2006, KRW 297,369, KRW 65,97,369), - repayment of KRW 1,450,00 on October 21, 2006 (interest on KRW 390,559, KRW 64,937,928) - Repayment of KRW 600,00 on October 31, 2006 (interest on KRW 320,241, the remaining principal and interest on KRW 64,658,169), the remaining principal and interest on KRW 70,00 (interest on KRW 350,748, KRW 630,748, KRW 658,169), the remaining principal and interest on KRW 1,30,00 on November 1, 206 (interest on KRW 6358,637,197, KRW 2017)
C. Therefore, from October 1, 2009, the following day after the Defendant: (a) filed a claim against the Plaintiff regarding the existence and scope of the obligation; and (b) on August 1, 2015, the date when the Defendant rendered a substantial decision on August 1, 2015.