logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원해남지원 2019.12.18 2019가합3213
대여금
Text

1. As to KRW 300,000,000 among the Plaintiff and KRW 100,000,000, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the full payment day from March 21, 2018 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On March 20, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) determined KRW 100 million to the Defendant; (b) on April 20, 2018, the period of repayment was 10 million to the Defendant; and (c) lent the loan by 1%

(hereinafter the above KRW 100 million is “the first loan of this case”). B.

On April 15, 2017, the Plaintiff determined KRW 200,000 as the Defendant and lent interest KRW 3 million per month (1.5% per month) to the Defendant.

(hereinafter the above KRW 200 million (hereinafter referred to as "the second loan of this case"). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 2 (including the serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff KRW 300 million (=the amount of loans KRW 100 million for the first loan of this case) and interest or delay damages on the second loan of this case, unless there are special circumstances.

B. On February 15, 2017, the Defendant concluded a monetary loan agreement on the first loan exceeding three times the principal even though the Plaintiff lent KRW 30 million to the Defendant on February 15, 2017, and the Plaintiff concluded a monetary loan agreement on the second loan exceeding 2.85 times the principal amount despite lending KRW 70 million to the Defendant from March 31, 2017 to April 15, 2017. The Plaintiff asserted that such act is against unfair legal acts or the principle of good faith and thus null and void as an act contrary to the above facts. In other words, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a monetary loan agreement on the second loan from around 1,88,9, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 to the Defendant from around 2017 to 200 million won, and the Plaintiff entered into a monetary loan agreement on the second loan from around 200 million to 370,718,200,000 won in its name.

arrow