beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 45,38,050 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from July 22, 2016 to April 6, 2017.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. In around 2013, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff who was a major shareholder of the Defendant at the time when the representative director was bound, making it difficult to raise funds for the company’s operating capital difficult, and the Plaintiff lent the funds by means of remitting KRW 50 million to the Defendant’s corporate account on September 5, 2013.
B. However, there was no special agreement between the parties regarding the period of repayment of the above loan, but the Plaintiff urged the Defendant to repay the loan within seven days from the date of receipt of the mail, through the content-certified mail as of April 12, 2016. Accordingly, the Defendant responded to the purport that “the obligation to repay the above loan is recognized, but the time limit for repayment is changed” to the Plaintiff through the content-certified mail as of April 18, 2016.
C. Meanwhile, in the case of determining the amount of litigation costs filed against the Plaintiff by the Defendant et al., the Seoul Central District Court 2015Kahap1002 (Seoul High Court 2015Ra1329) decided that the respondent (the Plaintiff) is 4,61,950 won repaid to the Plaintiff (the Defendant) in relation to the application for provisional disposition such as the suspension of the effect of resolution by board of directors, etc., and the decision became final and conclusive on June 22, 2016.
(Reasons for Recognition) The Seoul Central District Court 2016Kao969. [Ground for Recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 1 through 5, Eul 2 and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The defendant's assertion and judgment
A. According to the fact that the Defendant’s obligation to repay the loan of this case was recognized, since the maturity of the instant loan of this case has already arrived at the end of April 2016 at the latest, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the loan of this case of KRW 50 million and the damages for delay thereof, barring any special circumstance.
B. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s counterclaim for offset, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff offsets the Plaintiff’s claim against the aforementioned loans by its automatic claim, since it has KRW 4,611,950 as above.
Modern, Modern, and recognized earlier.