beta
Text
1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 46,718,169 and the interest rate thereon from August 24, 2016 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 22, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) with the terms that the vehicle amounted to KRW 53,800,00 (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) shall be KRW 1,214,40 per month rental fee, KRW 24% per year, and KRW 25,824,00 per year, and the estimated residual value value of KRW 25,824,00 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).
B. At the time of the conclusion of the lease contract, the Plaintiff obtained the Defendant B’s certificate of seal impression affixed to the joint and several sureties of the contract, the representative of the Defendant Company, and registered the Defendant B as a joint and several sureties of the lease contract of this case.
C. If the Defendant Company did not perform its obligation to pay monthly rent under the instant lease agreement, the Plaintiff terminated the said lease agreement based on the terms and conditions. Accordingly, the Defendant Company’s obligation to pay monthly rent is KRW 5,756,178 as of August 23, 2016, KRW 1,950,571, and KRW 39,01,420,000,000,000,000 per annum.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 6, and Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant company
A. According to the above facts, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of delay 46,718,169 won following the termination of the instant lease agreement (i.e., monthly payment of KRW 5,756,178 earlier, KRW 1,950,571, the outstanding principal of KRW 39,011,420) and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 24% per annum from August 24, 2016 to the date of full payment.
B. As to this, the Defendant Company asserts to the effect that it is unfair to claim the “unclaimed principal” without recovering the said vehicle, since it is currently in the parking lot so that the Plaintiff may have the instant vehicle returned.
However, the Defendant Company recovered the instant vehicle from the Plaintiff.