(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.01.18 2018가단215392

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2019.01.18 2018가단215392

대여금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 67,630,415 and KRW 63,537,864 from March 13, 2018 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 17, 2017, the Defendant entered into an agreement on the loan of KRW 70,000,000 from the Plaintiff with 60 months of the loan period, 24% per annum less than twice the overdue interest rate, 25% per annum at least twice the overdue interest rate, and 25% per annum, and the principal and interest were repaid in equal installments.

(hereinafter “instant loan agreement”). B.

The Defendant borrowed KRW 70,000,000 according to the instant loan agreement, but did not pay the principal and interest, and lost the benefit of time on February 28, 2018.

Meanwhile, the principal and interest of the instant loan is KRW 67,630,415 as of March 12, 2018, including principal KRW 63,537,864 as of March 12, 201, and overdue interest.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 10, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 25% per annum from March 13, 2018 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the base date for calculating the principal and interest of the loan in this case, as to the principal and interest of 67,630,415 won under the loan agreement in this case and the principal of 63,537,864 won, except in extenuating circumstances.

B. The defendant's assertion 1) The defendant asserts that the loan agreement of this case is null and void since it entered into the loan agreement of this case under the name of E and F with the F test. The defendant's assertion that the loan agreement of this case was null and void. Since the defendant concluded the loan agreement of this case with E and F with the plaintiff, it is not proved that the plaintiff, the other party, knew or could have known the fact that E and F, a third party, had committed fraud with respect to the declaration of intention of the other party. Thus, the defendant's above argument is without merit without further review. 2) The defendant's sale of the motor vehicle acquired after the receipt of the loan agreement of this case, should be deducted from the proceeds of the sale.

유사 판례

-서울남부지방법원 2019.04.05 2018가단217985

-서울남부지방법원 2019.08.13 2019가단228562

-서울남부지방법원 2018.11.28 2018가단237057

-대구지방법원 2015.09.11 2014가단4337

-부산지방법원 2016.10.06 2016가단38388