beta
Text
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 24,100,000 and KRW 13,000 among them, with the interest rate of KRW 24,00,000 from April 21, 201 to the day of full payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On April 21, 2014, the Defendant asked the Plaintiff, who is pro-friendly, to lend the vehicle purchase fund, and the Plaintiff was granted a loan of KRW 43 million from the lending company, and transferred it directly to the bank account of the automobile selling company designated by the Defendant, and the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff the loan interest of KRW 20% per annum for the said KRW 43 million to the Plaintiff.
B. On May 15, 2014, the Defendant repaid KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff.
C. The Defendant asked the Plaintiff to lend the liquor house operation fund, and the Plaintiff wired 100,000 won to the Defendant’s bank account four times between May 16, 2014 and August 4, 2014.
[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts finding that the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the principal 13 million won (i.e., 43 million won - 30 million won) that has not yet been lent to the Plaintiff as purchase funds, and interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 20% per annum, which is the agreement from April 21, 2014 to October 15, 2015, which is the date of lease. The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum, which is the agreement, from April 21, 2014 to the date of full payment. The principal 1.1 million won, which has not yet been repaid as the funds for the operation of the Empt and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from July 10, 2015 to October 15, 2015, which is the date following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, as requested by the Plaintiff.
B. As to the Defendant’s counterclaim, (i) the Defendant jointly operated an architectural interior firm under the trade name of the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and three parties, “D,” and the Plaintiff did not pay the amount of profit settlement for the last eight months, and thus, the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff for profit settlement against the Plaintiff is against the Defendant.