beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion
A. On March 7, 2011, the Defendant and the Defendant’s mother C borrowed KRW 100,000,000 from the Plaintiff, and repaid KRW 50,000,000 on March 31, 201, and repaid KRW 50,000 on August 1, 201, and recovered the loan certificate.
B. On September 8, 2011, the Defendant and C promised to set the interest at KRW 15,000,000,000, when arranging a monetary relationship with the Plaintiff, including interest on KRW 100,000,00.
C. The Defendant and C subsequently borrowed KRW 50,000,000 from the Plaintiff on November 10, 201.
At the time, the Plaintiff was above B.
45,000,000 won was deducted from the interest specified in the subsection and remitted 45,000 won to the Defendant’s account under the name of the Defendant.
Meanwhile, the Defendant and C remitted total of KRW 26,00,000 to the Plaintiff from June 15, 2012 to October 23, 2012.
Of the above transfers, 20,000, 20,000 won as interest during the period, 6,000,000 won as part of the principal.
E. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 44,00,00 not repaid among the loans extended on November 10, 201 and KRW 2,200,000 per annum from April 1, 201 to April 2, 2013, plus KRW 46,20,000 per annum for the total of KRW 46,200,000 and KRW 44,00,000 per annum from the day following the delivery date of the copy of the instant complaint to the day of complete payment.
2. According to the evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the Plaintiff received a document (Evidence No. 2) from C to the end of January 2012, 201, stating that “The Plaintiff will pay interest of KRW 15,000,000 to the end of January, 201.” On November 9, 2011, the Plaintiff kept the cash custody certificate, KRW 50,000,000, and the maturity date shall be March 31, 2012. The monthly interest shall be four copies, and KRW D Daegu Bank B shall be four copies, and KRW 5,00,000,000, KRW 5,000,000, and KRW 103,103,000,000 as revised E-dong No. 103, Feb. 6, 201, but the Plaintiff did not enter the part as “the Defendant’s cash custody” as “the Plaintiff’s cash custody.”