beta
Text
1. The plaintiff A:
A. Defendant C shall pay 282,00 won and its equivalent at the rate of 24% per annum from June 13, 2013 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the entries in Gap evidence 1-1-5 and all the arguments.
Plaintiff
A loaned to Defendant C, KRW 2% on November 1, 2005, KRW 7,000,000 within the due date of payment and KRW 7 months. 11.5,00,000 on November 5, 200 in the same year were set and lent within the due date of payment and 2% on November 15, 200, and 3,000,000 in the same year were set and lent within the due date of payment and 2% on November 15, 200, respectively.
B. On October 27, 2010, Plaintiff A lent KRW 4,000,00 to Defendant E with the interest rate of KRW 3% per month.
C. On October 27, 2010, Plaintiff A lent KRW 5,000,00 to Defendant F.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. Defendant C, D, and Plaintiff C, and D claimed that the rate of KRW 7,00,00,000 on November 15, 2005, and KRW 3,000,00 on November 15, 2005, respectively, were set and lent to Defendant C and D as 2% per month, respectively, and that Plaintiff C and D jointly set and lent KRW 10,000,000 on November 5, 2005 to Defendant C and D as 2% per month. As such, Defendant C and D jointly agreed to pay to the Plaintiff 10,00,000,000 and its interest rate of KRW 24% per annum from November 15, 2005 to the full payment date, and that money should be paid to the Plaintiff 5,00,000,000,000 per annum from November 15, 2005 to the full payment date.
First of all, considering that the lender of the loan of 5,00,000 won on November 2005 is not the plaintiff A but the plaintiff B's assertion in the above basic facts, considering that the statement of "B" in the loan of 5,00,000 won in the above loan of 205 is the plaintiff A, the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs alone is insufficient to recognize the lender of the above loan as the plaintiff B, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and therefore, this part of the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.
Next, as to the assertion that Defendant D is the borrower of each of the above loans, it is a loan certificate with respect to the above loans.