logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.05.31 2017가단225951
대여금
Text

1. The Defendants: (a) with respect to each of the Plaintiff KRW 160 million and KRW 110 million among them, respectively, from July 23, 2017 to July 2018.

Reasons

1. In fact, on December 22, 2011, the Plaintiff agreed to the Defendants to receive additional payment of KRW 50 million as the interest rate of KRW 110 million in KRW 12% per annum (1.1 million per month) and the due date for payment shall be three years after the date of the loan, but at the time of the repayment of principal, the Defendant B prepared and lent the loan certificate to the Plaintiff at the time.

The Defendants paid only interest on the said loan until July 22, 2017.

On July 22, 2017, Defendant C separately agreed to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 160,000,000 to the Plaintiff by July 31, 2017.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 3, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination on the claim

A. According to the above facts, the Defendants are obligated to pay interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 12% per annum, which is the agreed interest rate, from July 23, 2017 to January 15, 2018, and the rate of 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the following day to the date of full payment, to each Plaintiff under a loan agreement and agreement, and from January 16, 2018 to the date of full payment. The Defendants are obligated to pay for delay damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc. from January 16, 2018 to the date of full payment.

B. As to this, the Defendants asserted to the effect that the business is not obliged to pay KRW 50 million, but it is difficult to do so.

Since there is no evidence to prove that the payment of KRW 50 million has the conditions as argued by the Defendants, the above assertion by the Defendants is without merit.

Although Defendant B asserts that the loan amounting to KRW 100 million should be paid in installments, it is not acceptable to this part of the claim on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge that there was an agreement on installment payment.

3...

arrow