beta
Text
1. The part of the judgment of the first instance against the plaintiff shall be revoked.
2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 33,002,552 and 17,891 among them.
Reasons
1. The scope of the judgment in this Court requested the Defendant to pay each claim that the Plaintiff acquired from the Telecommunications Loan Co., Ltd. and the Korea Saemaul Bank (hereinafter “Korea Saemaul Bank”). The court of first instance dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on the claim that the Plaintiff acquired from the non-party Saemaul Bank and accepted only the remainder of the claim.
The plaintiff appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the claims that the plaintiff acquired from the non-party treasury.
2. In full view of the purport of the entire arguments in the evidence No. 1-1, No. 1-2, No. 2-2, No. 3, and No. 5 of the judgment, the non-party’s credit cooperative granted a loan of KRW 20,000 to the Defendant on April 11, 2001 at the maturity of payment on April 11, 2003, at the interest rate of KRW 12.7% per annum, and at the interest rate of delay compensation rate of KRW 19% per annum (hereinafter “instant loan”); thereafter, the non-party’s credit cooperative transferred the instant loan credit to the Plaintiff on June 28, 2013 with the delegation from the non-party’s credit cooperative; the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the transfer of the instant loan credit on June 23, 2014; the principal and interest of the instant loan to the Defendant on November 3, 2014; and the Plaintiff may be recognized as the grounds for the principal and interest of the loan.
According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 17% per annum as claimed by the plaintiff within the agreed rate of 3,002,552 won of the principal and interest of this case and 17,891,538 won of the principal and interest of this case and 17,891,538 won of the principal and interest of this case from November 3, 2014 to the day of full payment.
3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is accepted for reasons, and since the part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with a different conclusion, it is revoked and it is so decided as per Disposition by the court below to order the defendant to pay the above amount additionally.