beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following order for payment shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. On August 31, 2015, the Plaintiff’s assertion received agricultural card loans of KRW 5,000,000 (interest rate of KRW 13.2% per annum) from the Defendant, and the Defendant agreed to pay the principal and interest to the Plaintiff’s account in the name of the Plaintiff on the 25th day of each month, the repayment date of the said agricultural card loans.
(A) The Defendant paid KRW 5,00,000 to the account (D) in the name of the Defendant, after the Plaintiff received the Nong Card loan on the same day. However, the Defendant refused payment until July 25, 2016 after paying a total of KRW 1,70,000,000.
Finally, the Defendant is obligated to pay 3,890,770 won and delay damages to the Plaintiff, as of July 25, 2016, since the balance of the Agricultural Cooperative Card Loans was KRW 3,890,770, and the Defendant is obligated to pay 3,890,770 to the Plaintiff.
B. According to the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the Plaintiff received agricultural card loans of 5,000,000 won (13.2% per annum) on August 31, 2015 and lent them to the Defendant, the Defendant agreed to repay the principal and interest of the Nonghyup Card loans to the Plaintiff’s account under the Plaintiff’s name on the 25th day of each month, and the Plaintiff transferred KRW 5,000,000 to the Defendant’s bank account under the Plaintiff’s name on the same day (the Defendant only decided to repay the principal and interest of the loan to the Plaintiff, and did not conclude an interest agreement. However, considering that the Plaintiff and the Defendant were aware of the Plaintiff’s introduction and did not have any special relation, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff received only the principal and interest from the Defendant with the interest of 13.2% loans without interest is inconsistent with empirical rules, and thus, it is difficult to accept). Meanwhile, the Plaintiff’s total amount of the loan from the Defendant’s account as follows July 17, 2005, 2016.
Deposit on the date of deposit.