beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
Reasons
1. According to the facts below’s determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of the principal and interest on the loan of KRW 81,481,429 as below and the principal of KRW 53,90,000 among them, delay damages calculated at the rate of 23% per annum from April 27, 2015 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the base date for calculating the principal and interest.
Seoul Mutual Savings Bank (hereinafter “Seoul Mutual Savings Bank”) leased KRW 53,90,000 to the Defendant on April 27, 2012 at an annual interest rate of KRW 9.3% per annum, interest rate of delay damages 23% per annum, and ten months during the lending period.
(hereinafter “instant loan”). (b)
Seoul Mutual Savings Bank was declared bankrupt on September 26, 2013 by Seoul Central District Court 2013Hahap139, and the plaintiff was appointed as trustee in bankruptcy of Seoul Mutual Savings Bank on the same day.
C. Meanwhile, the sum of the principal and interest on the instant loan remaining as of April 26, 2015 is KRW 81,481,429 (= Principal KRW 53,900,000 and damages for delay).
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant borrowed the instant loan from the Seoul Mutual Savings Bank for the payment of part of the down payment under the intermediary of the Southern Mine Domins in receipt of the C apartment constructed by the Seoul Mutual Savings Bank (hereinafter “Seoul Mine Domins”).
However, the case has become legally managed by the subcontractor, and the subcontractor has failed to pay the construction cost to the subcontractor, so the subcontractor has not been able to exercise the right of retention for the above apartment.
The plaintiff is responsible for this situation as a financial institution that takes charge of an intermediate payment loan.
Nevertheless, it is unreasonable for the Plaintiff to claim damages for delay to the Defendant.
B. However, the Defendant’s claim for damages for delay is solely based on the circumstance asserted.