beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 100,000,000 as well as 6% per annum from March 16, 2009 to March 24, 2015 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The portion claimed for a loan on September 16, 2005;
A. According to Gap's evidence Nos. 1 (a chassis, the defendant recognized that the above loan certificate is identical to the defendant's seal, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, the defendant's defense is rejected, since there is no evidence to acknowledge it, since there is no evidence to prove it, the defendant's defense is not acceptable) and Gap's evidence Nos. 2 and 4 (including the paper number) as to the cause of the claim, according to the facts that the defendant borrowed 100 million won from the plaintiff on September 16, 2005 as interest rate of 50 million won per month, due date of payment, September 16, 2008, and the fact that the plaintiff paid interest only to the plaintiff until March 15, 2009 among the above loan principal and interest interest rate, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to pay damages for delay to the plaintiff from March 15, 2009.
B. The Defendant’s defense and judgment: (a) purchased vehicles from the Plaintiff on September 12, 2005, and agreed to deduct them from the principal and interest of the loan; (b) paid KRW 10,00,000 to the Plaintiff on January 14, 2013; and (c) under the Defendant’s promise to pay, the Plaintiff purchased air-conditions worth KRW 8,50,000,000 from August 20, 201; and (b) purchased any clothing worth KRW 8,50,000 from the Plaintiff on December 8, 201, around KRW 11,00,000 from the Plaintiff on behalf of the Plaintiff, around KRW 206, KRW 85,000,00 from the principal and interest of the loan; and (c) made each of the above loans to the Plaintiff on September 6, 2012.
First, there is no dispute between the parties that the Defendant purchased the vehicle from the Plaintiff with the money equivalent to the claim on September 12, 2005 regarding the Defendant’s claim for deduction of vehicle purchase price. However, if the Plaintiff purchased the vehicle from the Plaintiff on September 15, 2005, which was written by the Defendant on September 15, 2005, in addition to the purport of the entire argument, the loan certificate prepared by the Plaintiff on September 15, 2005 is not indicated.