beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff falling under the following order for payment shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. In the first instance court, the Plaintiff sought payment of credit card usage claims (hereinafter “first claim”) from the Nonghyup Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Agricultural Bank”), and the principal and interest of loan claims that were received from Solomon Mutual Savings Bank (hereinafter “second claim”) against the Defendant. The first instance court dismissed all of its claims as to the first and second claims.
As a result, the plaintiff appealed only to the claim portion relating to the first claim, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the above claim portion.
2. According to the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 6 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the defendant entered into an agreement on the use of the credit card with the Nonghyup Bank on March 2, 200, and thereafter, the defendant was in arrears in paying the above credit card amount and lost the benefit of the time limit for the above obligation. The plaintiff acquired the first claim from the Nonghyup Bank on December 12, 2008, and on March 23, 2009, notified the defendant of the purport of the above transfer and served the notice of the above transfer around that time. As of November 19, 2014, the plaintiff's credit card use amount against the defendant as of November 19, 2014 (the principal amount of KRW 13,361,761 (the principal amount of KRW 4,109,286 interest KRW 9,252,475).
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 17% per annum from November 20, 2014 to the date of full payment with respect to KRW 13,361,761 and the principal amount of KRW 4,109,286, which is the following day of the above base date.
3. If so, the part of the plaintiff's claim concerning the plaintiff's claim No. 1 is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance which has different conclusions is unfair, and thus the part against the plaintiff as to the above claim is revoked and the defendant is ordered to pay the above money.