beta
Text
1. Defendant A’s interest rate of KRW 2,473,93 and KRW 1,525,403 among the Plaintiff shall be from February 17, 2015 to the day of full payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On October 29, 2012, Tae River Loans Co., Ltd. leased KRW 2,000,000 to Defendant A at 24 months of loan period, interest rate on loan, and overdue interest rate, 39% per annum.
B. On December 9, 2013, Tae River Loans Co., Ltd.: (a) transferred the above loans to the Plaintiff on June 19, 2014; and (b) notified the Defendant A of the fact of transferring the said loans.
C. Defendant A did not fully repay the principal and interest of the above loan, thereby losing the benefit of time. As of February 16, 2015, the principal and interest of the above loan were KRW 2,473,993 (principal KRW 1,525,403).
Defendant A completed the registration of ownership transfer (hereinafter “instant registration of ownership transfer”) on June 24, 2013, on the ground of the sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) as of June 24, 2013 to Defendant B, one’s own form of each real estate listed in the separate sheet, which is one’s sole property (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”), as Seoul Northern District Court’s receipt No. 42482 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).
E. At the time of the instant sales contract, Defendant A was insolvent as a debt excess.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's entries in Gap's 1-5, 7, 9, 10, 11 (including additional numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts found in the determination as to the claim against Defendant A, Defendant A is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the agreed interest rate of 39% per annum from February 17, 2015 to the date of full payment, as to the agreed interest rate of 2,473,93 won of the above loan and the principal of 1,525,403 won of the loan and the principal of 1,525,403 won among them.
3. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B
A. If a creditor’s claim under preservation is established before the fraudulent act, the transferee may exercise the obligee’s right of revocation even if the claim has been transferred, and in such a case, the transferee shall exercise the obligee’s right of revocation even if the claim has been satisfied after the fraudulent act.