beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff, on July 29, 2005, lent the amount of KRW 30 million to the Defendant on September 30, 2005, with the due date set as of September 30, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant loan”). Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the instant loan of KRW 30 million and damages for delay.
2. Judgment on the defendant's defense
A. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the instant loan in full by issuing to the Plaintiff a provisional coefficient table of KRW 30 million equivalent to the amount of KRW 5 million which is the face value of the instant loan, and then repaying the household check in full. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant repaid the instant loan in full.
The evidence Nos. 1 to 3 (including each number) alone is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, so the defendant's above defense is without merit.
B. 1) The Defendant asserted that the debt of this case was extinguished by the extinctive prescription five years after the due date for the payment of the loan of this case. Since the Defendant, a merchant operating electric installations-related business, borrowed the loan of this case with his business funds [the fact that there is no dispute, the purport of the entire pleadings], this constitutes auxiliary commercial activities and the debt of this case is subject to the five-year commercial extinctive prescription. Since the lawsuit of this case was filed on October 1, 201, five years after the due date for the payment of the loan of this case, the debt of this case was already extinguished by the extinctive prescription prior to the filing of the lawsuit of this case. Accordingly, the Defendant’s defense was reasonable. 2) As to this, the Plaintiff paid 1.5 million won interest on the loan of this case to the Plaintiff on May 24, 2010, the extinctive prescription period was interrupted.
The Defendant paid KRW 1.5 million to the Plaintiff on May 24, 2010 (the fact that there is no dispute) but the Defendant paid the said money to the Plaintiff.