Plaintiff

Defendant 1 and one other

September 10, 2009

Daejeon District Court Decision 2008Gadan29112 Decided June 3, 2009

1. The part of the damages for delay in the judgment of the court of first instance against the Defendants exceeding the amount ordered to be paid under the following subparagraphs shall be revoked, and the Plaintiff’s claim corresponding to the revocation

The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff 50,000,000 won with 5% interest per annum from January 19, 2004 to June 3, 2009, and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. All remaining appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

3. The total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendants.

1. Purport of claim

The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff 50,000,000 won with 12% interest per annum from January 18, 2004 to June 3, 2009 and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 and 8 (including each number), the deceased non-party 1 (the non-party to the judgment of the Supreme Court) set the maturity of KRW 50 million to defendant 1 on Jan. 18, 2002 under the joint and several surety of defendant 2 on Jan. 18, 2004, the agreement rate of KRW 0.1% per month, and the non-party 1 died on Jan. 4, 2006 and as his heir died on Jan. 4, 2006, the plaintiff, non-party 2 (the name of the name before the name), the non-party 3, the non-party 2, and the non-party 3 transferred the inheritance share of the above loan to the plaintiff on Oct. 29, 208, and notified the defendant 1 of the above assignment of claim, and thus, the defendant was jointly obligated to pay the loan and delay damages to the plaintiff.

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

As to this, Defendant 1’s receipt of the above KRW 50 million from Nonparty 1 (the defendant asserted that he was led to only KRW 38 million, not from the date of the first pleading of the trial of the court of first instance, and that he was paid KRW 50 million, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that the confession was contrary to the truth and due to mistake, so the above confession has no validity of revocation of confession.) However, even if the confession was not given, Defendant 1 was given a donation to Defendant 1, and even if it was not given, Defendant 1 was given a donation to Nonparty 1, and Nonparty 2 was exempted from Defendant 1’s debt, and thus, it is impossible to comply with the plaintiff’s claim. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the above assertion by the Defendants.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendants jointly and severally seek payment of damages for delay from January 19, 2004 (the plaintiff from January 18, 2004, which is the due date for payment, but it is reasonable to calculate from the next day of the due date for payment, and the damages for delay from January 18, 2004, which is the due date for payment. It is also difficult to agree with the plaintiff to claim interest on the above temporary payment.) from June 3, 2009, which is the date of the first instance judgment (the judgment of the court of first instance is the principal of the borrowed money and the damages for delay from the date of the first instance judgment, which is more than 50 million won and the damages for delay from the due date for delay from January 19, 204, which is the due date for payment. The remaining part of the judgment of the court of first instance which is 10% interest rate per annum of the plaintiff's damages for delay from June 3, 2009, which is 10% interest rate per annum, which is 2% interest per annum.).

Judges Kim Sung-soo (Presiding Justice)