beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 43,132,00 and interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from February 25, 2016 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. On November 2, 2013, when the Plaintiff was in office as a member of the office of the Defendant church, and retired on November 2, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into an underwriter agreement with C, a new member of the office of the Defendant (hereinafter “instant agreement”) on November 2, 2013.
According to this, the defendant church pays to the plaintiff a monthly amount under the name of honorariums, etc.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence No. 3
2. The defendant's judgment on the defense prior to the merits is that the amount equivalent to the interest and the capital installment of a financial institution under the contract of this case is not a financial institution, not the plaintiff. Thus, among the lawsuit of this case, the part for which the plaintiff seeks payment to the defendant is not a party or there is no benefit of protection of rights, and the plaintiff
In a lawsuit for performance, the standing to be a party is a person who asserts that he/she has the right to demand performance, which is a subject matter of lawsuit, and whether the right to demand performance exists or not, shall be proved by the deliberation on the merits (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Da44387, Oct. 7, 2005). Unlike whether the Plaintiff has the above claims, the Plaintiff is entitled to be paid a loan interest and the amount equivalent to the installment to be given a loan from the Defendant, and the Plaintiff is seeking the performance of the contract by asserting that the Plaintiff agreed to be paid a loan interest and the amount equivalent to the installment to be given a loan from the Defendant. In addition, the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant agreed to pay the amount equivalent to the above interest and installment on his/her behalf to the Plaintiff
Therefore, the defendant's defense prior to the merits cannot be accepted.
3. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant should pay the amount stipulated in the agreement of this case to the plaintiff.
In this regard, the facts of the dispute, the absence of dispute, and the entry of Gap evidence 3.