beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 327,424,657 and KRW 160,00,000 among them.
Reasons
Plaintiff Co., Ltd. in the amount of KRW 130,00,000,000 on April 5, 2012, the same year
6.1. 30,000,000 won was lent to interest rate of 10% per month, and the facts that the Defendants jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan obligation on September 4, 2012 that the Defendants agreed to pay damages for delay of interest rate of 10% per month is not in dispute between the parties, or that the Defendants’ payment of damages for delay of interest is recognized by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap 1-1, 2, 3, and 4-1 through 3.
According to the above facts, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 160,00,000 and the amount of interest delay damages calculated by 30% (47 months) per annum for the period from September 4, 2012 to August 3, 2016, deducting KRW 18,000,000, the amount of which was paid by the Plaintiff from the amount of interest delay damages calculated by 18,00,000 (47 months) calculated by the Plaintiff during the period from September 4, 2012, and 15% per annum for the principal amount of KRW 167,424,657, and 160,000 for the principal amount of KRW 160,00.
Defendant C and D asserted that, from April 5, 2012 to June 1, 2012, Co., Ltd. repaid KRW 28,000,000 as interest, and that, on February 12, 2013, Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Defendant C and D claimed that the Defendants’ joint and several liability would extinguish the Defendants’ joint and several liability with the issuance of promissory notes with a face value of KRW 318,627,000, plus interest delay damages.
However, since the interest delay damages claimed by the Plaintiff in this case were incurred after September 4, 2012, it cannot be deemed that the amount claimed by the Defendants should be deducted. The Defendants’ assertion is rejected on the grounds that the F Co., Ltd. was notarized by promissory notes and the F Co., Ltd. did not have any evidence to acknowledge that there was such agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants.
Therefore, all of the Plaintiff’s claims against the Defendants are accepted.