logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.01 2014가단126580
대여금반환
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs are borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 18, 2004, on the date the bankrupt corporation was the Savings Bank (mutual savings bank No. 50,000,000, interest rate of 10% per annum, and 25% per annum between the Defendant and the Defendant, the credit transaction agreement was made between the Bank (mutual savings bank No. 50,000,000,000) and the Defendant.

On June 18, 2004, the bankruptcy bank deposited KRW 150,000 in the bankruptcy bank account (B) in the defendant's name on the basis of the above credit transaction agreement.

(hereinafter “instant loan”). The instant money was immediately withdrawn and was transferred KRW 50,000,000 to one bank account under the name of the Defendant, and KRW 100,000,000 to three bank accounts under the name of the Defendant, respectively.

B. On June 18, 2005, the maturity of the above loan was repaid on August 24, 2004, and on February 13, 2014, the overdue interest as of February 13, 2014 was entered into KRW 59,643,82.

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 to 3, Evidence No. 5 to 7, Evidence No. 12, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the principal and interest of the loan of this case to the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances.

3. Determination as to the expiration of extinctive prescription

A. The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s claim for the principal and interest of the instant loan is five years with commercial bonds pursuant to Article 64 of the Commercial Act. The instant lawsuit was filed on February 19, 2014, which was more than five years after the date on which the instant loan occurred, and thus, the extinctive prescription has already expired.

The plaintiff asserts that since the defendant paid interest by September 30, 2010 and approved the debt, the progress of the statute of limitations was suspended, and since the plaintiff filed the lawsuit in this case before the lapse of five years thereafter, the statute of limitations has not expired.

B. The claim for the principal and interest of the instant loan 1 is a five-year statute of limitations.

arrow