beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The following facts of recognition are not disputed between the parties, or may be acknowledged by adding up the whole purport of the pleadings to each entry in Gap evidence 1 and 2:
The Plaintiff is a lending company that has completed registration of credit business in accordance with the Act on Registration of Credit Business and Protection of Finance Users.
B. On February 25, 201, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 1,200,000 to the Defendant on August 15, 2011, the expiration date of the lending period at the rate of 44% per annum (hereinafter “instant lending contract”) and received KRW 226,400 per month from the Defendant by means of equal division of principal and interest.
B. The defendant on March 15, 2011, and the same year for the plaintiff.
4. 15. 15. The same year;
5. Each of 25. 226,40 won was deposited, but no longer installment was paid thereafter, thereby losing the benefit of July 25, 201. At the time, the principal of the instant loan remains in KRW 632,378.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of the loan principal amounting to KRW 632,378, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 44% per annum, which is the interest rate per annum from August 28, 2012 to the date of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks.
B. As to the Defendant’s assertion 1, around February 201, the Defendant entered into the instant loan agreement with the law firm head around February 2, 201 as a means to take charge of the case of individual bankruptcy, and for the payment of fees, the Defendant demanded the pertinent law firm not to proceed with the case of petition for bankruptcy and returned the remainder of the principal and interest of the loan that have not been repaid until then to the law firm head is known to the Plaintiff. Thus, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant did not remain the amount to be reimbursed. The Defendant’s above assertion is rejected. 2) Next, the Defendant did not accept the instant claim.