beta
Text
1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 62,51,835 and the interest rate thereon from April 26, 2016 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of evidence Nos. 1 through 7 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff entered into each lease agreement (hereinafter “each of the lease agreements of this case”) with Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”), as indicated in the table below, Sept. 29, 2014, and Oct. 27, 2014, and Defendant B jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant A’s obligations under the respective lease agreement. ② The Plaintiff terminated each of the lease agreements of this case around April 25, 2016 as the Plaintiff delayed the payment of the lease fees, and the overdue lease fees, etc. at the time can be acknowledged as identical to the facts described in the separate claim statement.
On October 27, 2014 on September 29, 2014, the contractual date of which is 50,00,000,000 won for lease of 1,280,127 won, 1,343,942 won with interest rate of 25% per annum 25.5% per annum 25% per annum, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 25% per annum, which is the overdue interest rate of 62,51,835 won per annum, and 62,51,835 won per annum from April 26, 2016 to the day of full payment.
2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion
A. The Defendants asserted to the effect that “the bond should be deducted from the unclaimed principal in calculating the amount of loss”.
According to each of the above evidence, each of the lease contracts of this case provides that "10% of the accrued principal" shall be included in the fixed amount of loss. Thus, it is difficult to deem that the plaintiff calculated the fixed amount of loss without deducting the deposit from the accrued principal. Thus, the above assertion by the defendants is without merit.
B. The Defendants asserted to the effect that “if interest and defined loss amount are combined, it exceeds the interest rate under the Interest Limitation Act,” but they cannot be deemed that the provision of the Interest Limitation Act applies to the stipulated loss amount.