beta
Text
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance that ruled against the plaintiffs to order payment below is revoked.
Defendant.
Reasons
Basic Facts
The reasoning for this part is that the court's explanation is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the removal of "the highest loan interest rate during the loan period" in the 13th and 9th of the judgment of the court of first instance, "the loan interest rate" in the 13th and 9th of the judgment of the court of first instance.
The plaintiff AM’s husband’s defense against the plaintiff AM and its judgment on the plaintiff’s main safety defense and the above defendant’s defense against the plaintiff AM were exempted from the obligation of the IM, and the defendant’s National Federation of Fisheries Cooperatives also accepted the obligation, and thus, the plaintiff AM’s claim for damages against the above defendant due to the loan of the plaintiff AM was transferred to BA, therefore, the plaintiff AM lost its standing to be a party to the lawsuit of this case.
Judgment
In the lawsuit of performance, the standing to be a party is the person who asserts his or her right to demand performance.
Since the existence of the right is a matter to be determined within the main text, the above defendant's above defense on a different premise is without any need to further examine it.
According to Article 3(2) of the General Terms and Conditions for Credit Transactions (hereinafter “instant Terms and Conditions”), a person who obtains a loan from a financial institution may choose whether the loan interest rate would be a fixed interest rate without any change in the interest rate during the loan period, or a change in the interest rate during the loan period. However, the Defendants could not choose a fixed interest rate in the execution of the instant UNized Loan, but were deprived of the Plaintiffs of the right to choose a fixed interest rate by explaining to the Plaintiffs as if the loan was only a loan by the fluctuation rate.
Therefore, the Defendants are thereby subject to the Plaintiffs.