logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.12.21 2018가단11263
대여금 등
Text

1. The plaintiff

A. As to KRW 102,809,316 and KRW 100,00,00 among them, Defendant A Co., Ltd. shall start from May 29, 2017.

Reasons

1. Facts without dispute;

A. On December 24, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement on the condition that the interest rate of KRW 100,000,000 shall be applied from December 28, 2015 to December 27, 2020, the interest rate of KRW 2.08% per annum, and the delay rate of KRW 12% per annum, with the Defendant Company A’s debt joint and several liability within the limit of KRW 120,000,000.

B. Defendant A, who received a loan of KRW 100,000,000 from the Plaintiff, began to delay interest from May 29, 2017, and became disqualified pursuant to Article 7 of the Framework Agreement on Loan Transactions.

C. On October 22, 2016, E died, and Defendant D’s sole inheritance of E’s property.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, Defendant A, the primary debtor, is obligated to pay the agreed damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from May 29, 2017 to the date of full payment, with respect to the principal amount of KRW 102,80,316, and the principal amount of KRW 100,000,000 among them, barring any special circumstance. Defendant D, jointly and severally with Defendant A, is obligated to pay the principal amount within the limit of KRW 120,00,000.

B. As to the determination of Defendant D’s assertion on the limitation of inheritance, Defendant D asserts to the effect that Defendant D is liable to repay within the scope of the property inherited from the network E. As such, Defendant D filed a petition for adjudication on the limitation of inheritance by inheritance under the Family Branch of Gwangju District Court 2016Ra2418 on December 30, 2016, and the fact that Defendant D received a report on the limitation of inheritance by inheritance as of January 19, 2017 does not clearly dispute the Plaintiff. As such, Defendant D does not intend to do so within the scope of the property inherited from the network E.

have an obligation to repay the money stated in the subsection.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant A is justified, and the plaintiff's claim against the defendant D is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims are accepted.

arrow