The principle of appropriation of performance in a case where the money repaid cannot extinguish all the principal and interest obligations.

Where the principal and interest are liable and the money repaid cannot be extinguished in whole, if there is no special declaration of the parties at the time of performance, it shall be appropriated in the order of the interest and the principal, and where the agreed rate exceeds the limited interest rate, the excessive portion shall be invalidated and appropriated according to the excessive portion.

Article 479 of the Civil Act, Article 477 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff

Korean Berneing Corporation

Seoul High Court Decision 65Na303 delivered on October 14, 1965, Seoul High Court Decision 65Na303 delivered on October 14, 1965

The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The defendant's attorney's grounds of appeal Nos. 4 and 5 are examined.

According to the judgment of the court below, the court below held that interest on each loan of this case was 5% per month, and that there was no dispute between the parties, and that there was an agreement between the plaintiff to waive the interest after March 17, 1961, and that there was an agreement between the non-party 2 and the non-party 1 of the court below's judgment, and that the defendant had an obligation to pay the loan of this case to the plaintiff 5,140,789 won to the plaintiff from October 16, 1961 to April 15, 1963 by adding up the whole purport of the pleading to the testimony of the non-party 1 of the non-party 2 and the non-party 1 of the court below's witness 2 and the non-party 1 of the court below's decision, and it is clear that the defendant had an obligation to pay the loan of this case to the plaintiff from 5,145,252 won to 50 won as the repayment of each loan of this case.

However, in cases where the principal and interest obligation cannot be extinguished, the interest shall be applied to the order of priority in cases where the parties have not expressed any special intent at the time of performance, and where the agreed rate exceeds the limited interest rate, the excess portion shall be null and void and appropriated according to the agreed rate (Supreme Court Decisions 4289Da12350 delivered on May 24, 1956, 65Da1368 delivered on September 21, 196). The first instance court and the lower court witness 2, who reviewed each testimony based on the records, have paid only the interest on the principal and interest on the loan to the Plaintiff, but only the interest on the principal and interest on the loan from March 29, 1962, which had not been paid to the Plaintiff, cannot be viewed as being in violation of the rules of evidence and there is no special ground for misunderstanding of legal principles as to the payment of the interest on the loan by the Defendant, even though the Defendant did not know at any time and without any other reasonable ground for misunderstanding of legal principles as to the payment of the interest on the loan.

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on other grounds of appeal, we decide to omit the judgment, and remand the original judgment to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Kim Young-chul Kim Young-ho (Presiding Judge)