(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.03.25 2015가단195378

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.03.25 2015가단195378

대여금

Text

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 102,548,810 won and 76,163,409 won among them to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 7, 2007, the Plaintiff entered into a credit transaction agreement with the Defendant with a fixed amount of 100,000,000 won (the change to KRW 81,00,000 in Ghana), interest rate MB 0.71% (the change to KRW 16.476%) per annum, 19% per annum (the rate of delay interest in Korean won loan 16.476%), 19% per annum (the rate of delay interest per annum 17% per annum, re-revision to 15%) on May 7, 2008 (the period extended to November 7, 2013) and carried out a loan to the Defendant on the same day.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant loan”). At the time, the Defendant approved that the said credit transaction agreement applies to the bank credit transaction basic terms and conditions.

B. The Defendant, on September 25, 2013, lost the benefit of the term of the instant loan in accordance with the Bank Credit Transaction Basic Terms and Conditions by delaying the repayment of interest on the instant loan.

C. The balance of the instant loan as of September 24, 2015 is KRW 102,548,810 (=interest of KRW 76,163,409 on the principal amount).

[Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1-3 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination:

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the agreed damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from September 25, 2015 to the date of full payment, with respect to KRW 102,548,810 in the balance of the instant loan and the balance of the principal of the loan, 76,163,409 in the remainder of the loan principal.

B. The Defendant’s defense asserts that, in order to secure the Defendant’s obligation for the instant loan, the Defendant created a collateral on the Plaintiff, Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B Apartment 201 Dong 407 (hereinafter “instant real estate”), which was owned by the Defendant, and the Plaintiff was paid the principal and interest of the instant loan in the auction procedure by exercising the said collateral security, and thus, the Defendant’s obligation for the instant loan was entirely extinguished by repayment.

In full view of the contents of evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the Defendant’s debts to the Plaintiff.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2015.02.03 2014가단17240

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.01.15 2013가단182378

-서울서부지방법원 2015.01.15 2014가합37019

-광주지방법원 목포지원 2018.09.19 2018가단52090

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.04.10 2014가단258098