beta
Text
1. As to KRW 375,265,087 and KRW 75,00,00 among the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the year from July 31, 2019 to September 4, 2019.
Reasons
1. Presumption
A. On July 5, 1999, E Union (hereinafter “E”) determined and lent KRW 150,000,000 to the Defendant at 12.5% per annum, 19% per annum, 19% per annum, 19% per annum, and 5 July 2002.
On February 23, 2009, the non-party union filed a lawsuit against the defendant for a loan claim with the Busan District Court Decision 2009Da20563, and on August 19, 2009, the above court sentenced the non-party union to pay the loan claim amounting to KRW 225,212,529 (i.e., the principal amounting to KRW 75 million and the interest amounting to KRW 37,188,57 overdue interest amounting to KRW 57,858,904, the principal amounting to KRW 75 million from January 11, 2005 to November 23, 2008, and KRW 75 million from November 24, 2008 to KRW 19% per annum from November 24, 2008, the above judgment became final and conclusive."
B. On June 12, 2018, the non-party union transferred the claim for the judgment amount to the Plaintiff, and notified the Defendant of the transfer of the claim on July 20, 2018, and around that time, the above transfer notification reached the Defendant.
C. As of July 30, 2019, the sum of the principal, interest, etc., of the foregoing judgment amount is KRW 375,265,087.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 to 4 each entry
2. Determination
A. According to the factual premise as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 18% per annum from July 31, 2019 to September 4, 2019, and 12% per annum from the following day to the day of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks, with respect to KRW 375,265,087 and KRW 75 million.
B. As to the Defendant’s assertion on the exemption of obligation, the Defendant asserted that the Nonparty was exempted from the remainder of the obligation from the Nonparty Cooperative while paying out the loan principal of KRW 150 million to the Nonparty Cooperative. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge this, the Defendant’s assertion is not acceptable. 2) As to the claim on the extinction of prescription.