logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.21 2016가단5024386
대여금 등
Text

1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 108,606,347 and KRW 100,00,000 among them to the Plaintiff. From January 18, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 30, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with Defendant A to lend KRW 100,000,000 for operating a pharmacy to Defendant A with the trade name “D”, on March 30, 2013, with the maturity of payment of KRW 100,000 for operating a pharmacy, and on March 30, 2013, with the interest rate of KRW 17% per annum, and accordingly, Defendant A lent KRW 100,000 to Defendant A.

B. After the maturity date of the instant loan agreement, the interest rate was changed to 15% per annum on September 30, 2015.

C. From June 30, 2015, Defendant A delayed the payment of the instant loan obligation, and on August 6, 2015, the Plaintiff notified Defendant A that he/she was deprived of the benefit of the time limit for the instant loan obligation.

On the other hand, on July 2, 2015, Defendant A transferred the instant pharmacy business to Defendant B, and Defendant B had operated the instant pharmacy by being transferred all of the instant pharmacy facilities and using “D” as it is while operating the instant pharmacy.

E. The principal and interest of this case remaining as of January 17, 2016 reaches a total of KRW 108,606,347 (the principal and interest of the loan, interest of KRW 100,000,000, and interest of KRW 8,606,347).

[Grounds for Recognition: Evidence No. 1-8, Evidence No. 3-2, Evidence No. 1-2, Evidence No. 3-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. According to the facts of the above recognition of the claim against Defendant A, Defendant A, as a party to the loan agreement of this case, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the interest rate of 15% per annum from January 18, 2016 to the date of full payment of the principal amount of KRW 108,606,347 with the loan agreement of this case and KRW 100,000 with the loan of this case.

3. Claim against the defendant B

A. According to the above facts, since Defendant A borrowed money from the Plaintiff for the operation of the instant pharmacy, the obligation of the instant loan constitutes a debt arising from the transferor’s business, Defendant B received the entire business of the instant pharmacy from Defendant A around July 2015, and used the trade name “D” as it is.

arrow