beta
Text
1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part concerning the Plaintiff’s claim for KRW 91,500 against the Defendants and damages for delay.
Reasons
1. An ex officio determination on the claim for gold 91,500 won and damages for delay thereof is sought from the Defendants for the payment order application amounting to KRW 91,500 and damages for delay, which are incurred as the expenses for demand procedure in the case of the payment order application which was executed before the instant lawsuit was filed. This constitutes litigation costs, which can be paid according to a judgment on the burden of litigation costs and a judgment on the confirmation of the amount of litigation costs. Thus, there is no benefit in litigation to seek the amount in the instant lawsuit, separately from the above judgment on
Therefore, this part of the instant lawsuit is dismissed.
2. Determination on the amount of KRW 60,000,000 and interest thereon, and damages for delay
A. In full view of the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1 and 2-1, 2, and 3 as well as the arguments, the Plaintiff: (a) on July 7, 2014, specified and lent KRW 60 million to Defendant B on September 5, 2014; (b) Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) and Defendant D drafted a monetary loan agreement with Defendant B to provide joint and several surety for the obligation to refund borrowed money to Defendant B; (c) the Plaintiff was the Plaintiff’s KRW 9.5 million on July 7, 2014, and the same year.
7.8.20.5 million won, and the same year;
7. Recognizing that a sum of KRW 30 million has been remitted from a bank account under the name of the Plaintiff to a bank account under the name of the Defendant B.
B. In a monetary loan contract (Evidence A1) that can be called a disposal document of a monetary loan contract that is the fact that the plaintiff claims as to the cause of the claim, the borrower and the borrower clearly state the defendant; according to the terms of the above monetary loan contract, the plaintiff's personal bank account was remitted KRW 60 million from the plaintiff's personal bank account to the defendant Eul's personal bank account; and the construction price paid by the company E (hereinafter "E") that is operated by the plaintiff's company E (hereinafter "E") to the defendant Eul whose representative director is the defendant's wife is all the construction price paid from the bank account in the above title C.