logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.09.05 2013나2023493
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The following facts are not disputed between the Parties, or are recognized by taking into account the respective descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4 through 7, 24, 27, 28 (including each number), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including each number), and the whole purport of the pleadings:

On September 24, 2008, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 275,000,000 to the loan principal from a Flaman Mutual Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Flaman Mutual Savings Bank”), and provided Nos. 101, Nos. 101, Nos. 201, and Nos. 301, and no. 301 of the former B’s underground floor and no. 01 of the land surface of the YYU-U.S. and completed the registration of the establishment of each neighboring mortgage to Flaman Mutual Savings Bank.

On September 1, 2009, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 100,000,00 from Franchising Mutual Savings Bank. During Ansan-si, the Plaintiff provided No. 101 of B's underground floors, No. 401 of Gyeyang-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D's Gyeyang-gu, and No. 202 of Gangseo-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government E-Bab02 as security and provided each collateral to Franchis Mutual Savings Bank.

At the time of each loan agreement, the Plaintiff agreed on September 24, 2008, with respect to the loan interest rate, “base interest rate of 4% per annum” and “3.8% per annum per annum” in the loan agreement of KRW 100 million on September 1, 2009.

On December 28, 2011, the Financial Services Commission rendered a decision to revoke business authorization for Flad Mutual Savings Banks.

On January 2, 2012, the Defendant was transferred the status of the said loan contract to the Plaintiff by the Financial Services Commission on December 28, 2011 under Article 14(1) of the Act on the Structural Improvement of the Financial Industry.

2. Determination

A. In relation to paragraph (a) of this Court’s claim, the Plaintiff’s claim amounting to KRW 1,765,520 among the two claims amounting to KRW 1,765,520 and KRW 4,125,00 of loan handling fees, as the expense for establishing the right to collateral on the loan from the first instance court to May 9, 2008 and the fee for loan consultants, etc.

arrow