beta
Text
1. Defendant A, B, C, D, and E are either KRW 20,808,875 and they are among the Plaintiff within the scope of the property inherited from the net F.
Reasons
1. The portion of the claim for loans against Defendant G
A. According to the evidence No. 6-3 and No. 4, the Plaintiff granted a loan of KRW 15,00,00 to Defendant G on March 22, 1996, with a rate of KRW 17% per annum on March 23, 1998, and delay damages rate of KRW 31,523,630 as of March 28, 2014 (i.e., principal amount of KRW 6,842,850, interest of KRW 24,532,580, and KRW 148,200), and the Plaintiff can be recognized as having attempted the loan as of February 25, 1997 by setting KRW 1,00,000 to Defendant G on December 31, 1997.
B. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, Defendant G is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 31,780,259 (i.e., the principal and interest of the loan of KRW 31,523,630 as of March 22, 1996 and KRW 256,629 as of February 25, 1997, the principal and interest of KRW 6,842,850 as of KRW 6,850 as of the agreed delay interest rate from March 28, 2014 to the day of full payment, barring special circumstances.
C. Defendant G’s defense against Defendant G is a defense that the statute of limitations expired on March 22, 2001 due to the Plaintiff’s failure to exercise his/her right for five years after the loan as a commercial claim.
On the other hand, the extinctive prescription period of each of the above loans will run from the date following the date on which the plaintiff is entitled to exercise his right, and the repayment period of each of the above loans is the date on March 23, 1998 and December 31, 1997, as seen earlier. As such, the lawsuit in this case was filed on August 5, 201, which was five years after the due date of each of the above loans. Since it is apparent that the lawsuit in this case was filed on August 5, 2014, which was five years after the due date of each of the above loans, the above defendant's defense of extinctive prescription has merit.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for loans against defendant G is without merit.
2. The portion of the claim for loans against the remaining Defendants except Defendant G
A. Facts of recognition A.