beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment as set forth below to the Plaintiff’s allegation of grounds for appeal, thereby citing it as it is by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act
2. The Plaintiff asserts that since the loan charges and indemnities imposed by the Defendant unfairly excessive, the portion exceeding the appropriate loan charges and indemnities should be returned as unjust enrichment, and that C’s payment of loan charges and indemnities up to the period of 2005 by the end of the statute of limitations is only a waiver of the C itself’s profit with the completion of prescription, the Defendant cannot set up against the Plaintiff as effective repayment, and that the period of extinctive prescription of the Plaintiff’s right to claim the return of unjust enrichment
In the following circumstances, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, Eul evidence Nos. 7, Eul evidence Nos. 10-1 through 8, Eul evidence No. 10-11, and Eul evidence Nos. 10-11, which can be seen as comprehensively considering the overall purport of pleadings. In other words, the loan charges imposed on the plaintiff by the defendant on the plaintiff seems to have been determined on the basis of the value of land calculated each year according to the loan agreement with the plaintiff, there are no circumstances suggesting that the plaintiff raised an objection that the amount would be excessive before the lawsuit of this case is filed even though the plaintiff was urged to pay unpaid loan charges, etc., and the payment of some loan charges and indemnities was made between December 30 and September 1, 206, and on June 4, 2009, the defendant prepared a letter of intent to pay all the loan charges in arrears from 202 to the defendant, and there are no significant and apparent defects in the defendant's disposition to impose indemnity. Thus, the defendant's assertion that this part of the loan charges and indemnity cannot be accepted.
In addition, above.