beta
Text
1.(a)
Defendant B’s KRW 300,000,000 and its amount are 12% per annum from January 1, 2008 to November 5, 2008.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B
A. A. Around November 12, 2007, the Plaintiff, under Defendant B’s joint and several sureties, set KRW 300,000,000 as due date for payment and lent the amount at 12% per annum on December 31, 2007, under the joint and several sureties of Defendant B.
(2) On October 24, 2008, the Plaintiff filed an application for the instant payment order against D and Defendant B with the Gwangju District Court Decision 2008 tea12453 (hereinafter “instant payment order”). The said payment order was served on D Co., Ltd. on November 4, 2008 and the Defendant B on November 20, 208, respectively, and became final and conclusive on November 20, 208.
(3) The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant B in order to extend the prescription period.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. (1) According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 30 million won with 12% per annum from January 1, 2008 following the due date of payment to November 5, 2008, the service date of the original copy of the instant payment order from January 1, 2008, the service date of the original copy of the instant payment order, and 32% per annum from the next day to September 30, 2015, the main text of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings, Article 2(2) of the Addenda to the Regulations on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings, Article 3(1) main text of Article 3(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26553, Sep. 25, 2015).
(2) As to Defendant B’s assertion, Defendant B asserted that, by paying KRW 90,000,00 to the Plaintiff, Defendant B agreed with the Plaintiff that Defendant B’s above loan obligations against the Plaintiff were fully repaid by granting the right to collateral security on real estate owned by Defendant D in the future.
Modern, Defendant B submitted.