logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2016.01.21 2015나22656
양수금
Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff shall be revoked.

2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 25,397,064 and 14,146.

Reasons

1. In the first instance court, the Plaintiff sought from the Defendant the payment of loan bonds and loan bonds acquired from the SP Savings Bank (hereinafter “SP Savings Bank”). The first instance court rejected the part of loan bonds acquired from the AP loan company and the part of the loan bonds acquired from the EP Savings Bank.

Since only the plaintiff appealed against this, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the loan claims that the plaintiff acquired from the SBA Savings Bank.

2. Determination

A. On July 17, 2009, the Defendant obtained a loan with a maturity of 16 million won from the SBA Savings Bank on July 17, 201, at the interest rate of 39.8%, and at the interest rate of 44.5% in arrears. The Plaintiff acquired the above loan claim from the SBA Savings Bank on December 28, 201, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim upon delegation of the notification of the transfer on June 5, 2012. (2) The loan unpaid as of November 9, 2014 is the principal of 14,146,689 won and delayed payment damages of 11,250,375 won and damages of 25,397,064 won.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap 1, 4, 5, and 9 and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 17% per annum as claimed by the Plaintiff within the scope of the agreed delay damages rate from November 10, 2014 to the date of full payment of the principal and interest calculated with respect to the above KRW 25,397,064 and the principal KRW 14,146,689.

3. As such, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and the part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance which has different conclusions is unfair, so it is revoked, and it is so decided as per Disposition by ordering the defendant to pay the above money.

arrow