logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.04.10 2014가단2597
대여금
Text

1. Defendant B’s KRW 5,956,505 as well as 5% per annum from February 25, 2014 to April 10, 2015 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. On August 28, 2013, the Plaintiff indicated to Defendant B only 2 million UN (hereinafter “N”) on August 28, 2013, regarding the claim for the return of loan.

(2) On September 28, 2013, Defendant B’s repayment of KRW 1 million out of the above loan principal on September 28, 2013, and Defendant B’s repayment of the loan principal on September 28, 2013, may be recognized by taking into account the dispute between the parties concerned, or the overall purport of the entries and arguments in Articles A and 1 and 2. Therefore, Defendant B has the obligation to return 1 million UN to the Plaintiff, barring any special circumstance. (2) As to the Defendant’s defense, Defendant B asserted that the aforementioned 2 million interest rate was deducted from 400,000 UN interest rate of KRW 200,00,000, and that this is a defense that the credit exceeds the highest interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act.

On August 28, 2013, the Plaintiff lent 200,000 UN to Defendant B, and the delivery of 1.6 million UN only after deducting 4 million UN interest rate from September 28, 2013 to September 28, 2013 is no dispute between the parties. This exceeds 30% per annum of the maximum interest rate under Article 2(1) of the former Interest Limitation Act (Amended by Act No. 12227, Jan. 14, 2014) and Article 2(1) of the Interest Limitation Act (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 25376, Jun. 11, 2014).

Although the plaintiff seems to run a business of lending money, there is no evidence to regard the credit business as a credit business operator who registered credit business in accordance with the Act on Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Protection of Finance Users in the Republic of Korea, the highest interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act shall be applied.

Therefore, 359,233 UN exceeding 40,767N (i.e., 1,60,000 x 30% x 31/365 x less than 31/365, and less than N) calculated on the basis of the ratio of 30% per annum for the period until September 28, 2013 to 1.6 million UN actually received by Defendant B was prior to deduction of interest pursuant to Article 3 of the former Interest Limitation Act.

arrow