beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 25,00,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from August 25, 2016 to September 28, 2016.
Reasons
Comprehensively taking account of the following purport of the written evidence No. 1, the Plaintiff’s lending of KRW 25 million to the Defendant on February 13, 2015. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 25 million to the Plaintiff.
Furthermore, the Plaintiff alleged that the repayment period was set on July 13, 2015 at the time of the lending as above, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, which constitutes a monetary loan agreement with no fixed payment period.
Meanwhile, in the case of a loan for consumption with no fixed time for repayment, the lender shall notify the lender of the return by fixing a reasonable period pursuant to Article 603(2) of the Civil Act, and the borrower shall be liable for delay from the time when the lender notified the return to the lender. However, there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the return of the loan of this case before the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case. Thus, it shall be deemed that the maturity of the loan of this case was due on August 24, 2016, when the period deemed reasonable from August 17, 2016, the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case where the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the return
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 25 million won and damages for delay at the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act and 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from September 28, 2016, which is the date of the ruling of this case, where it is deemed reasonable for the defendant to resist about the existence of the obligation or the scope of the obligation from August 25, 2016, which is the date following the due date for repayment, to the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above recognized limit, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit.