beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a lending company that completed registration pursuant to the Act on Registration of Credit Business, etc. and Protection of Finance Users (hereinafter “Credit Business Act”).
B. On December 6, 2010, the Defendant concluded a loan transaction agreement (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) with a credit business company E&P (hereinafter “ E&P loan”) that had completed registration pursuant to the Credit Business Act, setting the lending limit of KRW 10,000,000, the initial use amount of KRW 6,500,000, interest rate of KRW 43.54% per annum, interest rate of KRW 43.54% per annum, and interest rate of delay damages rate of December 6, 2013, as of December 6, 2013.
C. On December 2, 2013, the social loan A&P transferred the instant loan claim to the Gasg Capital Loan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Ysg Capital Loan”) and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the said credit on December 18, 2013, and the notification reached the Defendant around that time.
In addition, on February 22, 2014, the Bosg Capital loan transferred the claim for the instant loan to the Plaintiff, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the said claim on May 23, 2014 and delivered this notification to the Defendant at that time.
As of January 4, 2013, the loan balance of this case as of January 4, 2013 is KRW 6,850,000, and the interest rate and delay damages rate applied by the Plaintiff are 38.81% per annum.
[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff who acquired the claim for the loan of this case to pay the balance of the loan of this case 6,850,000 won and damages for delay.
B. The first defendant's argument as to the defendant's argument that the plaintiff alleged that the principal of the loan of this case or the initial amount of use of the loan of this case is KRW 6,50,000, but the first deposit to the defendant under the loan contract of this case is merely KRW 2,649,477, and thus, the plaintiff's claim amount should