logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.30 2017가단5156525
양수금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 50,407,781 and KRW 12,769,193 from June 15, 2017 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. The judgment net B (the deceased on January 9, 2017, hereinafter “the deceased”) obtained a loan by setting 16,50,000 won from the LG card on March 18, 2003 at an annual interest rate of 22% and delay damages rate of 24% per annum (hereinafter “instant loan”). The Defendant, the deceased’s husband’s husband’s husband’s husband’s joint guarantee of the above loan obligation; the Plaintiff received the instant loan claim from the LG card on May 13, 2005, and notified the deceased of the transfer on June 16, 2005; the principal of the instant loan claim calculated as of June 14, 2017, the principal of the loan claim was either 12,769,193,37,638,58, and there is no dispute between the parties or 37,638, and 38,000.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 50,407,781 won ( = 12,769,193 overdue interest of KRW 37,638,58) and delay damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from June 15, 2017 to the date of full payment, as requested by the plaintiff.

2. Determination on the defense of extinctive prescription and the second defense for the interruption of extinctive prescription

A. The Defendant asserts that the deceased’s claim for the instant loan was finally repaid on February 16, 2012, and the period of extinctive prescription expires five years from the above point of time. The Plaintiff asserts that the period of extinctive prescription has expired. The Plaintiff’s claim for debt adjustment to the Credit Counseling and Recovery Commission was finalized on June 5, 2012, and that the period of extinctive prescription has expired at the above point.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the descriptions of Fin Group Gap 4 and 5 as well as the purport of the entire arguments in relation to the fact-finding by the Credit Counseling and Recovery Committee of this Court, the deceased applied for debt adjustment to the Credit Counseling and Recovery Committee on November 30, 201 and completed the debt adjustment plan around February 10, 201, and accordingly, the debt adjustment plan was partly repaid and its credit recovery support became invalidated on the ground of unpaid debts, and the deceased’s debt adjustment thereafter.

arrow