(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.01 2014나70015

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.01 2014나70015

대여금

Text

1. The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim concerning it shall be dismissed;

2. The defendant shall be the intervenor succeeding to the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The Defendant was granted a loan of KRW 15,00,000,000 from the Bank on July 30, 2012 at the rate of 24.9% per annum on the interest rate and delay damages rate, and the Defendant was granted a loan of KRW 3,00,000 on March 28, 2013 at the interest rate and delay damages rate of KRW 38.9% per annum.

However, the defendant did not pay interest on the loan and did not pay it.

The loans from July 30, 2012 remain as principal 10,981,710 as of July 15, 2013, and the loans from March 28, 2013 remain as principal 2,621,685 as of July 21, 2013.

On the other hand, each of the claims of this case was transferred from the App Savings Bank to the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s succeeding Intervenor (the trade name before the change is Twep Loan Co., Ltd.) in order, and the assignment of claims was notified at that time.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap 1, 2, 5, Byung 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the fact of fact-finding, the Defendant is obligated to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 38.9% per annum from July 15, 2013 to the date of full payment for KRW 10,981,621,685, to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff, the final transferee of each of the loans of this case (=10,981,710 won 2,621,685 won) and for KRW 10,981,710, whichever is the agreed interest rate for delay from July 15, 2013 to the date of full payment for KRW 24.9% per annum from July 21, 2013 to the date of full payment for KRW 2,621,685.

However, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff transferred each of the loans of this case to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff, and thus, the Plaintiff did not have the right to seek the payment of each of the loans of this case any longer.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. The decision of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed, and the defendant shall be ordered to pay the money recognized in Paragraph 2 of this Article to the plaintiff succeeding intervenor.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.06.24 2014나69763

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.20 2014나69787

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.27 2014나70077

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.09.16 2015나5537

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.09.11 2020나4880