beta
Text
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 250,000,000 and KRW 236,000,000 among them, from March 21, 2015.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the claim
A. Examining the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including each number), the plaintiff lent to defendant B a total of KRW 236 million between July 26, 2013 and February 23, 2015, and the interest accrued until February 23, 2015 to the plaintiff by defendant B was the cause of KRW 14 million, and the payment of the loan amount of KRW 236 million between the plaintiff and the above loan amount of KRW 236 million on February 23, 2015 is the due date on March 20, 2015. In the event that the above loan amount is not repaid by the due date, it is recognized that the defendant C agreed to pay the interest of KRW 625 million on March 26, 2015 (interest at the rate of 30% per annum) to the joint and several debt of the defendant C on February 23, 2015.
According to the above facts, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the plaintiff 250 million won ( principal of KRW 236 million with interest of KRW 14 million) and the interest of KRW 236 million with interest of KRW 20,000,000,000 from March 21, 2015, which is the day after the due date for repayment to the plaintiff, for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum that the plaintiff seeks within the agreed rate from March 21, 2015.
(The plaintiff claimed damages for delay from March 20, 2015, the due date for payment, but the damages for delay can be claimed from the day after the due date. Therefore, the part claiming the payment of damages for delay on March 20, 2015 is without merit).
As to this, the Defendants asserted to the effect that the loan certificate (Evidence A No. 1) drafted on February 23, 2015 between the Plaintiff and the Defendants was prepared as a collateral, and the contents of the statement are different from facts, and that the actual total loan amount was agreed to be settled later between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, but there is no evidence to acknowledge the above assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.
2. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants is accepted within the scope of the above recognition.