beta
Text
1. The notary public against the Plaintiffs by Defendant D is on the notarial deed No. 409 of September 30, 2016, No. 2016, Sept. 30, 2016.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff Company A (hereinafter “Plaintiff Company”) is a company established for the purpose of the business of manufacturing electronic parts, etc., and Plaintiff B is the representative director of the Plaintiff Company, and Plaintiff C is an internal director of the Plaintiff Company.
Defendant D and E are marital relations.
B. Employee G of the Plaintiff Company’s employee G of the Notarial Deed under a monetary loan agreement was commissioned as an agent of the Plaintiffs to prepare the Notarial Deed of a monetary loan agreement with Defendant D and the creditor (Defendant D) on September 30, 2016 to the debtor (a joint debtor as a joint debtor) at the maturity of KRW 620,000,000 as at October 31, 2016 and the interest rate of KRW 0% per annum.
Accordingly, on September 30, 2016, a notary public prepared a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement No. 409 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) on September 30, 2016.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. On October 2012, the Plaintiff Company made a loan from the Defendants by means of a recommendation by employees G in charge of finance to raise operating funds. However, the Defendants did not have actually paid a loan to the Plaintiff Company, and in collusion with G, received the principal and interest of the loan by deceiving the Plaintiffs as if a total of KRW 1 billion was paid. The Plaintiffs entrusted the preparation of the instant notarial deed on the ground that the Plaintiff Company’s loan obligation to the Defendants was erroneously paid, and thus, compulsory execution based on the instant notarial deed should be dismissed. 2) The Defendants set the Plaintiff Company at the interest rate of KRW 1 billion from October 19, 2012 to November 18, 2014.
After that, the Plaintiff Company paid KRW 1.32 billion to Defendant D as interest for the loan, and repaid KRW 700 million out of the principal amount.
Plaintiff
The Company shall pay interest exceeding the interest under the highest interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act to Defendant D.