beta
Text
1. As to the Plaintiff’s KRW 255,00,000 and KRW 200,000 among them, Defendant B shall be from November 1, 2015 to November 25, 2015.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff loaned KRW 300,000,000 to the new bank (D) account under Defendant B’s name on January 23, 2006, KRW 50 million on February 27, 2006, KRW 50,000,000,000 on March 13, 2006, KRW 50,000,000 on April 8, 2008, and KRW 50,000,000 on April 10, 2008.
B. The Defendants remitted money from February 2006 to August 2013 to the Plaintiff as shown in the attached Table.
C. On January 2, 2014, Defendant B repaid the principal amount of KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff.
[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Summary of the parties' arguments
A. The Defendants jointly borrowed a total of KRW 300 million from February 27, 2006 to April 10, 2008, by setting the rate of 1% per month from February 27, 2006, where the business fund is required while operating a business.
However, the Defendants paid interest only until August 2013, and thereafter, paid the principal and interest in addition to the repayment of principal KRW 100 million on January 2, 2014.
Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally obligated to pay the principal amount of KRW 250 million to the Plaintiff (i.e., the principal amount of KRW 200 million from September 2013 to December 2013, 2013, KRW 9 million with interest of KRW 300 million on the principal amount of KRW 300 million from January 2014 to October 31, 2015, KRW 22 billion with interest of KRW 44 million with interest of KRW 200 million with interest of KRW 300 million from October 31, 2015) and delay damages for the principal amount of KRW 200 million.
B. Defendant B borrowed a total of KRW 300 million from the Plaintiff as interest-free.
However, Defendant B paid the Plaintiff a total of KRW 343 billion as shown in the attached Table from February 23, 2006 to January 2, 2014, by remitting a total of KRW 340 million to the Plaintiff under his/her or his/her name, and Defendant B did not have a loan obligation against the Plaintiff.
Defendant C as a considerable refluence, taking into account the circumstances of Defendant B’s bbrupted situation.