beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 498,655,869 and KRW 487,59,542 among the Plaintiff’s KRW 498,65,869 shall be monthly from April 1, 2016 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. Facts of recognition 1) C short, loan certificate (No. 2) stated that the Plaintiff was leased, and the assignment certificate (No. 1) stated that “D” as the mother of C was leased, but the actual person who lent money is C, the husband of the Plaintiff. On August 2, 2012, the Defendant lent KRW 500,000,000 to the Defendant (hereinafter “the instant loan”).
The interest was determined as 1.6% per month from March 2, 2015. (2) On March 9, 2015, between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the wife of C, and the Defendant, written a loan certificate stating “50 million won,000,000 won, and the Defendant, the obligor, as the obligee, have been duly borrowed from the Plaintiff, the obligee (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. According to the above facts of recognition, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant, barring any special circumstance, is a person who received interest from the Defendant from February 3, 2016 to January 2016, which the Plaintiff sought against the Plaintiff as well as from February 3, 2016.
The agreed interest rate of 1.6% per month is liable to pay.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant borrowed KRW 50 million from C on August 2012, and received only KRW 461 million, which deducts KRW 15 million as prior interest, under the name of the principal and fees, from C. The Defendant claimed that the amount of interest so deducted shall be deemed to have been repaid on the date of borrowing the principal, and that the portion of the interest paid to C in excess of the interest calculated by deducting the interest accrued from the principal, among the interest paid to C, shall be deemed to have been appropriated as the principal and should be deducted.
However, there is no evidence to prove that C deducts 39 million won as advance interest and fee.
Rather, it is based on the above evidence, Gap evidence No. 10 (including paper numbers), witness E's testimony and whole purport of pleading.