beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 53,287,635 and KRW 34,034,114 from September 30, 2016 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On April 16, 2012, a non-Eston Capital Co., Ltd. entered into a contract for facility leasing (lease) with the Defendant, setting the acquisition cost of KRW 80,000,000 with respect to B, KRW 2,060,954 per annum, the lease interest rate of KRW 6.8% per annum, and an overdue interest rate of KRW 24% per annum (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).
B. After that, the Defendant, while making a transaction under the instant lease agreement, lost the benefit of time due to the delayed payment of lease fees after February 9, 2014, and as of September 29, 2016, the Defendant’s obligation to pay the lease fees remains (i.e., the principal amount of KRW 34,034,114, KRW 19,253,521).
C. On September 29, 2016, non-SPPP Co., Ltd. transferred to the Plaintiff a lease fee claim against the Defendant under the instant lease agreement, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim at that time.
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 4 (including additional number), purport of the whole pleadings]
2. Determination:
A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, the transferee of the lease fee claim, the total amount of KRW 53,287,635, and the principal amount of KRW 34,034,114, which is calculated at the rate of 24% per annum, which is the overdue interest rate, from September 30, 2016 to the date of full payment.
B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, it is unreasonable to claim payment of interest after disposing of the machinery subject to the instant lease agreement at salt prices and with a considerable amount of time. However, the Plaintiff, as the assignee of the claim, sought reimbursement against the Defendant for the repayment of the remaining lease interest and interest pursuant to the terms of the instant lease agreement entered into between the Defendant and the original obligee, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the principal and interest were unfairly calculated. In the instant case, the Defendant did not have any grounds as alleged above.