logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.01.25 2016가단77170
대여금
Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 76,07,343 and KRW 44,456,749 from April 19, 2016 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 49,858,028 to the Defendant on January 21, 201, with the due date set at 15% per annum on January 21, 2021 (hereinafter “instant loan agreement and the instant loan”). The Defendant lost the benefit by the due date on April 201 due to the delinquency in repayment of the principal and interest of the instant loan, and as of April 18, 2016, the balance of the instant loan was KRW 76,007,343 (i.e., principal amount of KRW 44,456,749 and delay damages amount of KRW 31,50,594), and the interest rate for delay damages is 15% per annum.

B. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff delay damages at the agreed rate of 15% per annum from April 19, 2016 to the date of full payment, with respect to KRW 76,007,343 and KRW 44,456,749, whichever is the day following the calculation of the final delay damages.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant, upon the Plaintiff’s active recommendation, used the Plaintiff’s Mysbook for more than 10 years, and the Plaintiff forced the Plaintiff to enter into the instant loan contract for the purpose of raising funds for repayment of Mysbook loans while refusing the extension of due date of the Pysbook. Thus, the Defendant asserts that the instant loan contract constitutes unfair legal acts.

However, the circumstances alleged by the Defendant alone, at the time of entering into the instant loan agreement, the Defendant was in the status of Domine, Sora or Unexperienced.

In addition, it is insufficient to recognize that the instant loan contract constitutes a juristic act that has considerably lost fairness.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. The defendant asserts that the principal and interest of the instant loan were extinguished by prescription.

The starting date of the extinctive prescription is the starting point of calculating the period of extinctive prescription, which falls under the requirements of the occurrence of the legal effect of the claim, and it constitutes the specific facts constituting the legal requirements of the extinctive prescription defense.

arrow