logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2020.06.25 2019가단11941
대여금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay the following money to the plaintiff:

(a) 49,662,464 won;

B. The above A.

28,000 of the money stated in this subsection.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff loaned 50 million won to the defendant as of June 17, 2013, and 28 million won as of April 1, 2016, respectively. As of February 28, 2019, the loan extended as of June 17, 2013 plus 10,943,674 won as principal, interest, and delay damages, and the loan extended as of April 1, 2016 plus 3,218,790 won as the principal, interest, and natural damages, and delay damages, the loan extended as of April 1, 2016 plus 10,000 won as of June 17, 2013, the loan extended as of 10,943,000 won as of June 13, 2018, the loan extended as of 2013.14% per annum.

According to the facts found above, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 49,62,464 won (=7.5 million won + KRW 28 million + KRW 10,943,674 + KRW 3,218,790 + KRW 3,500,000 + KRW 7.5 million per annum from March 1, 2019 to the date of full payment; KRW 13.82% per annum from March 1, 2019 to the date of full payment; KRW 28,000 per annum from March 1, 2016 to the date of full payment) and KRW 15% per annum from March 1, 2019 to the date of full payment.

Furthermore, the Plaintiff sought further payment of damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum from March 1, 2019 to the date of full payment with respect to the principal amount of loan amounting to KRW 7.5 million on June 17, 2013. However, there is no evidence to prove that during the above period, the Plaintiff’s interest rate on the above loan exceeds 13.82% per annum, which the Plaintiff claimed as 15% per annum.

The plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

2. The plaintiff's claim is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow