beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 44,256,100 and KRW 43,400 among them, 15% per annum from October 1, 2014 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On June 2, 2011, the Defendant was granted a loan of KRW 481,00,000 in the name of the Seoul Agricultural Cooperative in North Seoul Special Metropolitan City.
In relation to the above loan, the Plaintiff entered into a guarantee insurance contract with the Defendant and the insured North Seoul Agricultural Cooperative, the insurance amount of KRW 43,400,000,000.
At the time of the conclusion of the contract, the defendant did not perform the contract with the insured, and if the plaintiff pays insurance proceeds to the insured, he decided to pay the damages for delay in addition thereto.
B. Since then, as the Defendant failed to perform the contract for the repayment of the loan, the Plaintiff paid 43.4 million won insurance money to the insured on July 2, 2014 at the request of the insured.
C. The damages for delay determined by the Plaintiff is 6% per annum for 30 days from July 3, 2014 to August 1, 2014, 9% per annum for 60 days from August 2, 2014 to September 30, 2014, and 15% per annum for 15% thereafter.
Accordingly, when calculating damages for delay up to September 30, 2014, 856,100 won is as follows.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, purport of whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of determination, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 44,256,100 as indemnity and the amount of KRW 43,40,00 as principal and KRW 43,40,00 as indemnity and delay damages calculated by an agreement of 15% per annum from October 1, 2014 to the date of full payment.
The defendant asserts that it is true that he has signed the documents related to loans from the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Agricultural Cooperative, but that the actual lender is B.
However, since the fact that the defendant directly entered into a guarantee insurance contract with the plaintiff is also recognized by the defendant, such circumstance alone does not necessarily lead to the exemption of the liability for reimbursement.
3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is justified and acceptable.