beta
Text
1. The Defendant: KRW 36,918,949 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from December 7, 2017 to October 16, 2018; and
Reasons
Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as indicated in the evidence Nos. 1 and 5 and evidence Nos. 7-1, 2, 3, and 4, the Plaintiff received a loan from the National Bank on May 17, 2016 and remitted the amount of KRW 40 million to the Defendant. The Defendant loaned the amount of KRW 182,983 to the Plaintiff from June 2016 to November 2016, the amount of principal and interest that the Plaintiff has to repay to the Plaintiff each month (179,889 won from December 2016 to May 2017, 2017, etc.) to the Plaintiff. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff’s lending of KRW 190,00 to the Defendant on April 1, 2016.
Meanwhile, until August 2017, the Plaintiff received reimbursement of KRW 3,081,051 out of the above principal of the loan from the Defendant from the Defendant as the Plaintiff.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated on December 7, 2017, which is the day following the date of serving the copy of the instant complaint, which can be seen as the filing date, for the remainder of the loan (40,000,000 won - 3,081,051 won) and for delay from January 1, 2017, which is the day following the date of serving the copy of the instant complaint, which can be seen as the filing date (the Plaintiff asserts that the maturity date of the loan was December 31, 2016, and there is no evidence to prove that the maturity date is the same as the above) by the Defendant is reasonable to dispute on the existence or scope of the obligation to perform the instant case, at least five percent per annum under the Civil Act until October 16, 2018, which is the date of the judgment of this case, and at least 15 percent per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Facilitation, etc. of Legal Proceedings.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.