beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 10 million won with 24% per annum from January 1, 2012 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. As to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence No. 1, the defendant asserted that since the plaintiff's signature is different from the content of the above deed, and signed without regard to the main text, the content of the above document is invalid against the defendant. However, since there is no evidence to acknowledge it, the above argument is not accepted.
In light of the purport of the entire pleadings, the Defendant decided to pay KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff up to December 31, 201, and the interest rate shall be 2% per month on August 2011.
(hereinafter “instant agreement”). According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the agreed delay damages at the rate of KRW 100 million and 24% per annum from January 1, 2012 to the date of full payment, except in extenuating circumstances.
2. Judgment on the grounds for extinctive prescription defense
A. In light of the gist of the defense, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s claim for the instant agreed amount was made in the course of financing the Defendant Company C’s supply-related operating funds, and that the extinctive prescription is five years, and that the instant lawsuit was concluded on March 14, 2018, which was far earlier than five years from December 31, 201, the maturity date of the instant agreed amount, and that the said extinctive prescription has expired. Accordingly, the Plaintiff asserted to the effect that the instant agreement cannot be deemed as an obligation arising from a commercial activity that the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant as a result of the Plaintiff’s commercial activity.
B. Considering the relevant legal principles, merchants are engaged in commercial activities as the subject of rights and obligations arising out of commercial activities. It is naturally premised on the fact that a person who performs an act for business is qualified as a merchant in order to obtain the application of the Commercial Act as an auxiliary commercial activity.
Even if a company is deemed to be a merchant under the Commercial Code, the representative director, who is an institution of the company, is not a merchant.
The representative director borrows money to be used by the company's operating funds.