beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff's scope of a party member's trial: ① a claim for the credit acquired from the National Card (the principal of 4,400,000 won and delay damages thereof) and ② a claim acquired from the New Bank (the principal of 5,740,870 won and delay damages). The first instance court dismissed the above claim and dismissed the above claim. ② The plaintiff appealed only for the above claim. The scope of the party member's trial is limited to the above claim ① claims.
2. The following facts are recognized in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, 10, and 12.
A. On December 30, 2008, the National Card Co., Ltd. provided the Defendant with a loan of KRW 4,400,000 at maturity on April 1, 2009.
B. On June 21, 2013, the National Card Co., Ltd. transferred the claim for the above loan to the Plaintiff, and the notification of the transfer was made on December 6, 2013, a duplicate of the application for payment order issued on May 14, 2014.
C. The interest rate applied by the Plaintiff to the above loan claims is 17% per annum, and the principal and interest as of December 5, 2013 are as listed below.
Principal 4,400,00 won overdue interest of KRW 1525,316 won until May 30, 2013, 2385,271 won in overdue interest of KRW 5,310,587 in total from May 31, 2013 to December 4, 2013.
3. Determination
A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 17% per annum from December 6, 2013 to the date of full payment, as claimed by the Plaintiff, with respect to the total amount of KRW 5,310,587, and the principal amount of KRW 4,400,000 among the above loan claims.
B. The Defendant’s argument regarding the Defendant’s claim is alleged to have been extinguished upon the completion of the five-year extinctive prescription period, and thus, it is apparent that at least on December 6, 2013, the Plaintiff applied for the instant payment order, at least on December 30, 2008, was within five years from December 30, 2008, the execution date of the instant loan, and thus, the Defendant’s above assertion.