logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2020.11.04 2019나117512
대여금
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of the claim.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On December 10, 2007, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff lent KRW 90 million to the Defendant on the due date on January 14, 2009. The Defendant is obligated to pay the above borrowed amount of KRW 90 million and delay damages to the Plaintiff.

B. As long as the establishment of a disposition document is recognized as authentic, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the expression of intent as stated in the disposition document, unless there is any clear and acceptable evidence to deny the contents of the statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Da23482, Jun. 28, 2002; 2017Da235647, Jul. 12, 2018) and the overall purport of the statement and pleading as stated in evidence No. 1-1, and evidence No. 1-1, the defendant asserted that the amount of KRW 90,000,000,000 as stated in the above loan certificate was not the actual amount of loan, but considering that the defendant's assertion that the above amount of loan certificate was not the real amount of KRW 90,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000 won or more, it cannot be accepted.

B It is recognized that the loan was made on January 14, 2009 and the delay damages amounting to 4 million won per month respectively.

Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant: (a) pursuant to Article 2(1) of the former Interest Limitation Act (amended by Act No. 10925, Jul. 25, 201) and Article 2(1) of the former Interest Limitation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 20118, Jun. 11, 2014); and (b) pursuant to the provision on the maximum interest rate under Article 2(1) of the former Interest Limitation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 20118, Jun. 11, 2014), the maximum interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act was 30% per annum at the time the Defendant borrowed the said KRW 90 million from the Plaintiff.

within the scope of this section.

arrow