logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.01.19 2016가단211128
대여금
Text

1. As to KRW 132,00,000 among the Plaintiff and KRW 110,000,000 among them, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the year from November 1, 2014 to January 18, 2016.

Reasons

1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the evidence Nos. 1 and 3 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff agreed on Oct. 1, 2014 that the Plaintiff shall pay 10 million won to the Defendant (formerly changed C Co., Ltd.) on Oct. 31, 2014 and 10% per annum for delay (hereinafter “the instant loan”). If the Defendant did not repay the instant loan within the limit of 60 days from the due date, 5% of the loan shall be paid as a penalty, and if the Plaintiff did not pay the loan in the lawsuit or demand procedure, 15% of the principal amount shall be paid as attorney’s fees. The fact that the Defendant failed to repay the instant loan within the limit of 60 days from the due date, and the fact that the Plaintiff applied for the payment order at the time of the Plaintiff’s request for the payment of the loan is apparent in the record.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 110 million, KRW 55 million, KRW 16.5 million, KRW 132 million, and KRW 16.5 million.

2. The defendant's assertion and judgment

A. As to this, on October 31, 2014, the Defendant paid 50 million won in arrears to the owner of the building, which was operated by Da to Hawon. On November 7, 2015, the Defendant agreed to deem the Plaintiff’s shareholders as the repayment of the instant loan the amount of KRW 50 million out of the instant loan as the repayment of the loan. Thus, according to the evidence Nos. 1, 6, and 7, E, one of the Plaintiff’s shareholders, entered into an investment contract with Da for business on October 31, 2014; the Defendant, on October 31, 2014, may recognize that the Plaintiff deposited 50 million won to Mac’s Co., Ltd. on October 31, 2014; however, it appears that the Plaintiff agreed to have agreed to the effect that the Plaintiff’s testimony was 50 million won in the instant loan and 50 million won in the instant loan, without considering the evidence No. 50,000,000.

arrow