logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2021.01.21 2020가단3576
대여금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 246,652,070 won and 241,274,880 won among them from April 29, 2020 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments as to the grounds for the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the plaintiff loaned KRW 241,274,880 on August 23, 2016 to the defendant on March 31, 2020 with interest rate of KRW 5.2% per annum, interest rate of KRW 8.2% per annum, interest rate of overdue interest, and interest rate of KRW 8.2% per annum, and the defendant's failure to pay interest after December 20, 2019 can be acknowledged to the fact that KRW 5,377,190 has occurred as of April 19, 200 due to the failure to pay interest rate of KRW 5,377,190, interest rate of KRW 246,652,070 (= interest rate of KRW 241,274,80, interest rate, overdue interest rate of KRW 5,37,190 and interest rate of KRW 284.287.28.

2. The Defendant asserted that the instant loan was extended by the intermediate payment related to the sale of officetels constructed by C Co., Ltd., and that the said executor and construction company did not extend the intermediate payment loan with the Plaintiff when the building was not completed after June 2019, the scheduled date of completion of the building, and that the said executor and construction company did not pay interest, and that the Plaintiff is also responsible for the failure of the above executor and construction company to properly manage the fund. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s seeking for the payment of the loan to the Defendant is unjust.

However, the above executor and the contractor are responsible for not properly managing the funds to the Plaintiff.

In addition, there is no evidence to see that the Defendant cannot refuse to repay the loan to the Plaintiff solely on the ground that the Defendant asserted as above, and thus, the above argument by the Defendant is difficult to accept.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow