beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked, and
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the statements and arguments set forth in subparagraphs A through 4 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the Plaintiff loaned KRW 7.4 million to the Defendant on June 9, 2014; KRW 3 million on June 13, 2014; KRW 4 million on July 1, 2014; KRW 3 million on July 15, 2014; KRW 9 million on July 29, 2014; KRW 7.5 million on August 1, 2014; KRW 200,000 on August 24, 2014; KRW 300,000 on August 1, 2014; and KRW 300,000 on August 14, 2014; and KRW 200,000 on September 17, 2014; and the Plaintiff loaned each of the above facts to the Defendant.
Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant shall be deemed to have agreed between the Plaintiff and the Defendant to repay the remainder of the loans excluding the loan amounting to KRW 13 million on September 17, 2014 with interest agreement, as follows: (i) ( KRW 7.4 million in KRW 4 million in KRW 7.5 million in KRW 7.5 million in KRW 7.5 million in KRW 7.5 million in KRW 7.5 million in KRW 2 million in KRW 1.3 million in KRW 2.2 million in KRW in KRW 1.2 million in KRW in KRW) In full view of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to deem that there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant to repay the remainder of the loans excluding the loan amounting to KRW 13 million in proportion to the amount of the debt, as seen below.
① Even after the Plaintiff received certain amount from the Defendant, the interest paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff for KRW 13 million was set at KRW 520,000 per month.
② Unlike the loan on September 17, 2014, the above loan was not lent from the Plaintiff’s financial resources as seen below, but it was lent by the Plaintiff to the Defendant again from a third party, and the Plaintiff also paid interest of KRW 520,000 per month to a third party as the borrower. The Plaintiff’s other loan claims and its nature are different.
There is an obligation to pay damages for delay.
B. As to this, the defendant directly paid 7.4 million won of material price to D, which is the defendant's customer, as of June 9, 2014. The defendant asserts that there is no fact that he borrowed the above money from the plaintiff.
Domins, B.