beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 35,00,00 out of KRW 104,740,684 and the above amount from April 6, 2017 to the day of full payment.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. On June 10, 2007, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 35,000,00 to the Defendant on June 10, 2007 at the maturity of 24% per annum, and 24% per annum. 2) The Plaintiff received respectively from the Defendant KRW 2,50,000 on July 10, 2009, KRW 1,500,000 on November 2, 201, and KRW 2,000,000 on January 22, 2015, and KRW 2,50,000,000 on July 14, 2015 to February 20, 2017, and KRW 50,000 on April 50, 2017.
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings
B. The facts of the above determination and the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the satisfaction of the claim
Unless there is any evidence to prove that the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to grant designation or appropriation to the Defendant, the amount repaid by the Defendant is partially appropriated for 81,790,684 won with interest (= principal amount of KRW 35,000,000 x 3,554/365 (from July 11, 2007 to April 5, 201) x 24% per annum, and less than KRW 104,740,684 won with interest of KRW 81,790,684 (= interest of KRW 35,000,000) - interest of KRW 12,50,000 and interest of KRW 350,000,000 with interest of KRW 35,00,000 and interest of KRW 350,000 with interest of KRW 35,00 with interest of KRW 40,00 after the date of repayment).
2. The defendant's argument regarding the defendant shall be paid KRW 5,00,000 to the plaintiff on April 3, 2017, and the remainder of the loan shall be exempted, and it is alleged that the plaintiff cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim by concluding an agreement on the exemption period. Thus, among the evidence No. 1 (written confirmation of the closure of debt), it shall not be admitted as evidence since there is no evidence to acknowledge the authenticity of the part concerning the plaintiff's name in the document No. 1 (written confirmation of the closure of debt), and there
3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.