beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 60,000,000 and its ratio shall be 15% per annum from June 6, 215 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. From around 2006, the Defendant has made a monetary transaction from around 2006 in which the Defendant borrowed money from the Plaintiff and paid interest.
B. At the request of the Plaintiff on June 16, 201, the Defendant prepared a letter of intent to provide the Plaintiff with the principal amount of KRW 50 million and interest KRW 7.5 million by June 16, 201 (hereinafter “first letter”) and delivered it to the Plaintiff as a security if the Plaintiff did not perform the said letter, and the Plaintiff did not pay the same amount of liability if the payment was made by extending the execution date by the 30th day of the same month, and the Plaintiff did not perform the said obligation. C. On August 1, 2011, the Defendant drafted a letter of intent to offer C apartment as security (the title “contract,” but the title “second letter”) and drafted a second letter of intent to offer C apartment by the 12th day of the same month.
5. He additionally stated that he shall be subject to legal procedures, thereby delivering to the Plaintiff.
The Defendant, on July 19, 2012, paid KRW 60 million to the Plaintiff by July 30, 2012, and prepared a loan certificate stating that 150 square meters shall be offered as security at the time of Non-performance of obligation (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) and delivered it to the Plaintiff.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts that there is no dispute between the parties, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. According to the above facts, according to the judgment on the cause of the claim, the Defendant is liable to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum from June 6, 2015 to the date following the service of the payment order notice issued by the Plaintiff, as the Plaintiff seeks, from June 6, 2015 to the date following the service of the payment order notice by the Plaintiff.
B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant asserted that the loan certificate of this case was made by the Plaintiff’s strong pressure, and that the Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 4,360,000 to the Plaintiff.