beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 15,850,00 for the Plaintiff and its related KRW 5% per annum from June 3, 2016 to August 9, 2017, and the next day.
Reasons
1. In full view of Gap evidence No. 4-1 of the judgment on loans 32,450,000 won, Gap evidence No. 6-1 of the judgment, fact-finding results on Busan Jung-gu, and the overall purport of the pleadings, it is recognized that the plaintiff lent money of KRW 32,450,000 (the plaintiff did not claim the amount below 00,000 won) to the defendant as follows.
"The loan amount of KRW 3,600,000 transferred to D (Defendant's wife's wife) account on June 1, 2012, "the loan amount of KRW 7,500,000 on the loan date" 8,500,000 on November 20, 2012, "the loan amount of KRW 8,50,000 on June 27, 2013, "the loan amount of KRW 8,00,000 on June 27, 2013, "the loan amount of KRW 32,450,500 on June 22, 2013, 200 on the loan amount of KRW 353,780 on February 19, 203, the Defendant was obligated to pay the above loan amount of KRW 32,50,000 on the loan amount of KRW 2,500 on the loan amount of KRW 50,005,00 on its own.
The plaintiff asserted that the defendant agreed to repay the above loan one month after the date of each loan, and claimed damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from the day following the last loan date until the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the repayment agreement after one month, and the plaintiff's assertion in this part is without merit
2. The Plaintiff’s loan of KRW 10,000,000 is determined as above.
In addition to loans amounting to KRW 32,450,00, which are recognized in this paragraph, the Defendant lent KRW 10,000 on November 20, 2013 to the Defendant. However, as seen so, the entry of KRW 1 in the evidence as stated above is difficult to believe, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
The above argument is without merit.
3. Conclusion: (a) From June 3, 2016 to June 9, 2016, the Defendant concluded that the Plaintiff’s balance of KRW 15,850,000 and the next day following the delivery of a duplicate of the instant complaint to the Defendant, the Defendant is 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act until August 9, 2017, which appears reasonable for the Defendant to dispute the existence and scope of the instant obligation; and (b) the promotion of litigation from the following day to the date of full payment.