beta
Text
1. Defendant C’s KRW 39,00,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from March 1, 2014 to November 30, 2016.
Reasons
1. Where there is no dispute between the parties to the determination as to the claim against Defendant C, or comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire argument as to the statement in the evidence No. 1, Defendant C agreed to pay interest on the loan of this case between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff on December 1, 2013, the remaining loan amount of KRW 40 million against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the loan of this case”), KRW 10 million as of June 2014, KRW 10 million as of July 2014, KRW 10 million as of August 2014, KRW 10 million as of August 2014, and KRW 10 million as of September 2014, and KRW 10 million as of September 2014.
According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant C is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Civil Act from March 1, 2014 to November 30, 2016, which is the date of the adjudication of this case, after deducting KRW 1 million from the loan principal of the Plaintiff, who was repaid by Defendant C on May 18, 2015, and from the next day to the date of full payment, the interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of KRW 39 million per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the next day to the date of full payment.
2. As to the claim against Defendant B, the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the joint obligor of the instant loan debt or the instant loan debt, Defendant B, jointly and severally with Defendant C, asserts that Defendant B is jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the remaining principal of the instant loan amount of KRW 39 million and interest or delay damages.
However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that Defendant B is the joint obligor of the instant loan or the obligation of the instant loan is the joint and several surety, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant C is accepted within the extent of the above recognition, and the remainder is dismissed as there is no ground.