logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 논산지원 2018.11.08 2018가단100
대여금
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 90,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 24% per annum from October 1, 2017 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

The Plaintiff lent money to C as follows, and the Defendant guaranteed C’s respective loan obligations on each lending date.

After that, the Plaintiff extended the repayment period for a temporary loan agreement on May 22, 2014, with 24% per annum on May 22, 2015, where the repayment period for a loan agreement was extended on a net basis as follows, on May 22, 2015: 24% per annum on June 30, 2014; and 24% per annum on June 30, 2015, June 30, 2015.

The Plaintiff received interest and delay damages on each of the above loans from C until August 31, 2017.

【In light of the above-mentioned facts, 【A’s evidence Nos. 1-1 through 3, “A’s evidence Nos. 3, and “A’s evidence Nos. 1-1,” “C’s testimony, and “the cause of claim for determination of the overall purport of the pleadings”, the Defendant, as a guarantor, is obligated to pay as interest and delay damages calculated by the rate of 24% per annum from October 1, 2017 to the date of full payment of the interest and delay damages that the Plaintiff seeks from October 1, 2017 to the date of full payment of the interest.

On this basis, the defendant asserted that the plaintiff agreed to reduce the interest rate of the above loan to 1.5% per month around August 2016 and to 1% per month around January 2017.

However, it is not sufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff agreed with C to reduce the above interest rate solely by the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 6, 7, and Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

The above argument is without merit.

Furthermore, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s claim in this case is a violation of the good faith principle, since it is difficult for C to repay the loan due around August 2017, while the Plaintiff received interest equivalent to C by reserving the due date after the due date for each of the above loan was due, with the Plaintiff’s payment of interest or the additional tax revenue and expenditure of C.

The principle of trust and good faith in civil law.

arrow