beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 40,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 24% per annum from December 10, 2013 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiff can be acknowledged that the plaintiff received from the defendant the 40,000,000 won from the plaintiff on October 16, 1995 (hereinafter "the loan in this case"), and the interest shall be paid at 28% per month on the 28th day of each month. The time of debt repayment shall be the time when the plaintiff makes a claim. The time of debt repayment shall be the time when the plaintiff makes a claim."
(hereinafter “instant monetary loan agreement”) 2. Determination
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of 40 million won borrowed and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 24% per annum from October 29, 1995 to the date of full payment.
B. The defendant's defense is proved to be groundless since 22 years have passed since the date of conclusion of the monetary loan contract of this case, and the plaintiff's claim is alleged to be groundless. Thus, the defendant's assertion that the period of extinctive prescription has expired is examined as to the legitimacy of
(1) According to the above facts, the repayment period of the loan of this case is "the time when the plaintiff makes a request," and this is an indefinite term and the extinctive prescription period has arrived from the time when it became objectively due. Thus, on December 9, 2016, the time when the plaintiff makes a request for the payment of the loan of this case upon the plaintiff's filing of the lawsuit of this case, the payment period has arrived (as stated in the evidence No. 3, it is recognized that the plaintiff has dispatched a certificate of contents to the defendant to notify the payment of the loan of this case to the defendant on November 18, 2016, but there is no evidence to prove that the above peremptory notice has reached the defendant, and it is difficult to deem that the due date has arrived at the time of the notice). The defendant's defense that the credit of this case has expired after
(2) Regarding the interest claim on the instant loan.