beta
Text
The defendant shall pay 22,700,000 won to the plaintiff and 24% per annum from July 18, 1998 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
On December 18, 1997, the Plaintiff: (a) on December 18, 1997, lent KRW 22,700,000 to the Defendant at interest rate of 24% per annum; (b) on December 18, 1998, the due date for repayment; and (c) received a loan certificate issued by the Defendant as the borrower.
(hereinafter “instant loan”). From May 30, 2013 to October 30, 2015, the Plaintiff received 3,000,000 won per month from the Defendant in relation to the instant loan.
[Grounds for recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, judgment of the purport of the whole pleadings, and the above facts are examined. According to the above facts, 3,00,000 won paid by the defendant should be preferentially appropriated for interest under Article 479 of the Civil Act, unless there are special circumstances. It is reasonable to deem that the interest of 3,178,000 won (22,70,000 won x 24% x 7 months x 12 months) was appropriated for interest of this period. Thus, it is reasonable to deem that the above 3,00,000 won paid by the defendant was appropriated for interest of this period.
Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the interest rate of 22,700,000 won of the loan principal of this case and the interest rate of 24% per annum from July 18, 1998 to the day of full payment as the day following the termination date of the above interest calculation period.
The defendant's assertion is first of all, the defendant's husband at the time when he borrowed from the plaintiff, and he is only the guarantor. However, considering the fact that at the time of the loan of this case, the plaintiff was issued a certificate of loan under the name of the defendant, the defendant is a party to the loan of this case. Thus, the above argument is without merit.
Then, the defendant asserts that the debt of this case was extinguished by the extinctive prescription, and thus, the debt of this case was extinguished by the extinctive prescription on July 18, 2008 after ten years from July 18, 1998, the due date for payment. However, on the other hand, the defendant from May 30, 2013 to October 2015.