beta
Text
1. Defendant B’s 30,000,000 won and the interest rate of 25% per annum from October 1, 2015 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. According to the evidence No. 1 to No. 3 of the claim No. 1 to No. 3 against Defendant B, the Defendant borrowed KRW 30 million from November 30, 2013 to February 6, 2015 at the interest rate of KRW 36% per annum, and on February 6, 2015, it is recognized that the Defendant prepared a certificate of borrowing KRW 30 million from the Plaintiff.
Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay at the rate of 25% per annum under the Interest Limitation Act from October 1, 2015 to the date of full payment.
However, according to Article 2(1) of the Interest Limitation Act, Article 2(1) of the Addenda, Article 2(1) of the Interest Limitation Act, and Article 2(1) of the Addenda, and the Addenda of the Interest Limitation Act, the maximum interest rate under the contract for lending and borrowing money is 25% per annum, and the above provision is applied to the renewal of the contract after July 15, 2014, which is the enforcement date of this Act. Thus, the part exceeding the annual 25% of the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit.
2. Claim against Defendant C
A. The plaintiff's assertion first, the defendant Eul, who was represented by the defendant Eul, prepared a loan certificate as a joint and several surety for the debt of the defendant Eul, and the defendant Eul is obligated to repay the loan amount to the plaintiff, and even if the defendant Eul was not authorized to act as the defendant Eul, the expression agent is formed, so the defendant Eul is jointly and severally liable to pay the loan amount to the plaintiff with the defendant Eul.
B. First of all, with respect to the fact that Defendant C conferred the power of attorney to conclude a joint and several guarantee contract to Defendant C, it is insufficient to recognize the same only by entering the evidence No. 5, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
Next, in order to claim the effect of an expression agency in excess of the authority under Article 126 of the Civil Act with respect to whether the expression agency is constituted, acts other than the authority of the agent by clearly or implicitly expressing the intention of the agent for the principal.