beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 49,787,465 as well as KRW 48,00,000 among them, from December 5, 2014 to the day of full payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. As of December 3, 2011, the Defendant drafted a lease agreement between the lessor B, deposit amounting to KRW 18 million, and the term of lease from January 6, 2012 to January 15, 2014, with respect to the lessor C building 404 Dong 1401-dong 1401.
B. On January 9, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a lease loan agreement with the Defendant to grant a loan with a maturity of KRW 48 million on January 5, 2014, and at the interest rate of 11.9% per annum (hereinafter “instant lease loan agreement”) on a deposit repayment claim under the said lease agreement (hereinafter “the instant lease loan agreement”) as a condition to guarantee the pledge on the deposit repayment claim under the said lease agreement and the lessor’s consent.
C. The Plaintiff executed a loan to the Defendant pursuant to the instant loan agreement, and on February 17, 2014, the remainder of the principal and interest pursuant to the instant loan agreement as of February 17, 2014 is KRW 49,787,465 (i.e., principal amount of KRW 48,00,000,000, KRW 412,162,375,303).
【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 6, the purport of whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from December 5, 2014 to the date of complete payment, as the Plaintiff seeks with respect to the remaining principal and interest of loan 49,787,465 won under the loan agreement and the remaining principal of loan 48,000,000 won.
B. (1) The purport of the Defendant’s defense was that the Plaintiff deposited the loans under the loan agreement of this case into the account B, and did not pay the Defendant, and even if the Plaintiff received the refund claim of the deposit of this case as security, the principal and interest of the loan based on the loan agreement of this case was not recovered.