logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.07.03 2015가단112265
대여금
Text

1. The Defendant’s interest rate of KRW 37,419,659 and KRW 35,385,170 among the Plaintiff shall be from March 7, 2015 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On June 5, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a mid-term installment financing business, or facility leasing business, which is a corporation established under the Specialized Credit Financial Business Act, with the Defendant, a loan of KRW 40 million, KRW 36 months, interest rate of loan 13.9% per annum, and interest rate of delay rate of KRW 29% per annum (hereinafter “the instant loan agreement”).

B. According to the instant loan agreement, the Defendant did not delay the payment of the paid amount or pay the installments more than twice consecutively, and the Defendant decided to lose the benefit of time when the unpaid amount exceeds 1/10 of the installment price. The Defendant lost the benefit of time exceeding 1/10 of the fixed amount by failing to pay KRW 5,456,821 from November 23, 2014 to February 23, 2015.

C. As of March 6, 2015, the Defendant did not pay to the Plaintiff KRW 37,419,659 in total, including KRW 35,385,170, interest unpaid, KRW 1,700, KRW 716, and delay damages KRW 333,773, etc.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 29% per annum from March 7, 2015 to the day of full payment, which is the agreed delay damages rate of 37,419,659 won in total and the remaining principal under the loan agreement of this case.

B. As to the judgment on the defendant's assertion, the defendant, as the actual debtor of the loan contract of this case, only lent the name of the defendant, and the defendant also possessed a motor vehicle under the loan contract of this case and could not respond to the plaintiff's claim. However, if the third party directly signed and sealed as the principal debtor or the joint guarantor in the loan-related documents, such as the monetary loan agreement, if he/she had the

arrow