logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.03.15 2017나33178
양수금
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 plaintiff's assertion

A. On January 29, 2013, the Business Love Loan Co., Ltd. lent money to the Defendant with the amount of KRW 3,000,000,000, interest rate on loans, and interest rate on delay rate of KRW 39% per annum.

B. On December 31, 2013, 2013, Pice Capital Loan Co., Ltd. received the above loan claims against the Defendant. On February 22, 2014, the Plaintiff again received the above loan claims against the Defendant from Pice Capital Loan Co., Ltd., and on February 22, 2014, the Plaintiff, on behalf of the transferor, notified the Defendant of the assignment of claims on behalf of the transferor.

C. The principal of the loan credit is KRW 2,993,589 as of March 18, 2013.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff, the assignee of the claim, the amount of KRW 2,93,589 and damages for delay calculated by the rate of KRW 39% per annum, which is the rate of damages for delay from March 19, 2013 to the date of full payment.

2. If the transferor fails to notify the obligor or fails to take over the claim (Article 450(1) of the Civil Act), but fails to meet the requirements for setting up against the obligor such as notification by the transferor or consent by the obligor, the transferee of the claim is prohibited from claiming any right against the obligor on the ground that there is no legal relationship between the obligor and the obligor.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 90Da9452, 9469, Aug. 18, 1992). Therefore, we first examine whether each obligee’s lawful notification of the assignment of claims to the Defendant was given to the Defendant.

According to the evidence evidence No. 2, the plaintiff, the agent of the first transferor, and the agent of the second transferor, together with the plaintiff, who was the agent of the second transferor, sent the notice of assignment of claims by stating the defendant's domicile as "Yeocheon-gu B 104, Yeonsu-gu, 2014" on May 23, 2014, but the defendant also sent it.

arrow