logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.02.12 2014가단56207
대여금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 458,105,916 as well as KRW 289,80,000 among them, from July 7, 2014 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

On April 15, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for a loan of KRW 483,00,000, and April 15, 201 on the expiration date of the loan; the agreed rate is changed periodically; the overdue interest rate is from 14% per annum to 21% per annum as determined by the Plaintiff; the Plaintiff’s execution of the loan of KRW 289,80,000 under the instant contract; the Defendant paid only the interest debt incurred until April 15, 2010 among the principal and interest payment obligations under the instant contract; the unpaid interest rate is 458,105,916, including interest interest accrued until July 6, 2014; the agreed rate is 14% per annum to 14% per annum to 289,80,000,000,000,000 per annum; or there is no dispute between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff as to the agreed interest rate of KRW 165,71646,7,7546,7.7

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff interest at the rate of 458,105,916 won as the repayment of the principal and interest of loan under the instant contract and interest accrued at the rate of 14.33% per annum from July 7, 2014 to the date of full payment.

(A) The Plaintiff sought a payment of interest in arrears from July 4, 2014. However, according to the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 5, as the interest in arrears was calculated by adding up the interest in arrears that occurred until July 6, 2014, the base date of the interest in arrears claimed in the instant case is reasonable to deem that the base date of the interest in arrears claimed in the instant case was July 7, 2014). Accordingly, the Defendant entered into the instant contract with the Plaintiff during the process of selling the apartment in lots, and the said apartment is liable for the payment of interest in arrears due to the difference between the model lower court’s apartment and the actual apartment, and it is unreasonable for the Plaintiff to demand the Defendant to repay the loan to the Defendant.

or as the defendant.

arrow