Text
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 332,200,000 and KRW 300,000 among them, from April 15, 2015 to May 15, 2015.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The status of the party is the same as that of Defendant C, and Defendant B is prior to the divorce of Defendant C.
B. Around April 2005, the Plaintiff and Defendant C agreed with Defendant B to take over all the property rights and management rights of Defendant B, the mother of Defendant B, and to take over the above property rights, etc. from August 15, 2005, by paying the acquisition price in full, and then acquiring the above property rights, etc. from Defendant B on October 15, 2007. Then, on October 15, 2007, the Plaintiff transferred the above rights to Defendant B to Defendant B, and then, on the acquisition price, the obligor, the loan amount of KRW 300,000,000, and the due date of payment on October 15, 2010, interest rate of KRW 3,300,000 (annual interest rate of KRW 13.2%), interest payment date of KRW 12,200, and Defendant C’s joint and several debt loan agreement (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”).
C. The Defendant’s details of accrued interest and delay damages are KRW 32,200,000,000, which the sum of the interest and delay damages that the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff by April 14, 2015.
[Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, the purport of the whole pleading
2. The Defendant agreed to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 300,000,000 as of October 15, 2010 on the date of maturity for payment (13.2% per annum). The Defendant C guaranteed the above obligation, and the Defendant’s total amount of interest and delay damages that the Plaintiff did not pay to the Plaintiff by April 14, 2015 is 32,20,000,000 as seen earlier. Accordingly, the Defendants jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff delayed payment damages from the following day after calculating interest, etc. on KRW 332,20,000 and KRW 300,000,000.
3. The Defendants asserts that the Defendants’ assertion of set-off against the Plaintiff asserted that the unpaid claim against the Plaintiff, which Defendant C operated along with the Plaintiff, is offset against the instant agreed amount claim.