beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 30,00,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate from March 10, 2015 to June 24, 2015; and (b) June 25, 2015.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. From March 2005 to July 2014, the Plaintiff performed the work of self-production, sale, etc. at the art office of “C” operated by the Defendant, by setting the relation with the Defendant from March 2005 to July 2014.
B. On March 4, 2015, after the termination of the annual relationship with the Plaintiff, the Defendant prepared a loan certificate stating that “I, on or before March 9, 2015, I have promised to pay to A wages and retirement pay in full to the obligee A and pay in full.”
(hereinafter the defendant's promise to repay the above amount (hereinafter referred to as "the agreement of this case"). [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry of Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 30 million and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from March 10, 2015 to June 24, 2015, which is apparent that the date of delivery of a copy of the instant complaint from March 10, 2015, to June 24, 2015, 20% per annum as stipulated under the Civil Act, from June 25, 2015 to September 30, 2015, and from October 1, 2015 to the date of full payment.
B. As to this, the Defendant was unable to perform his duties by threatening the Defendant to take a serious bath and verbal abuse, such as telephone, text message, Kakakao Stockholm, etc. without night. At the time of the drawing up of the loan certificate, the Defendant forced the Defendant, who is suffering from drinking and drinking alcohol, to take a loan certificate as a retirement allowance, and forced the Defendant, who is suffering from drinking, to take the loan certificate as a kind of money, at the time of drawing up the loan certificate. The Defendant was aware that the Plaintiff was not the Defendant’s intention, and the Plaintiff was aware that he was not the Defendant’s intention, and thus, the Defendant’s instant agreement constitutes null and void as a declaration of intention, not a medical doctor, or as a coercion of the Plaintiff.