beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay 401,284,200 won to the Plaintiff and 25% per annum from June 13, 2015 to the day of full payment.
Reasons
1. The fact that the Plaintiff, on December 31, 2012, lent KRW 140,238,00, KRW 142,591,200, KRW 118,45,00, and each initial interest per annum (3 months during the change cycle), the due date for payment was 7% (3 months during the change cycle), December 31, 2013 (Provided, That if the Plaintiff did not notify the repayment of the interest without delay, the due date shall be automatically extended until the loan will be converted into the secured loan), and the damages for delay shall be 25% per annum, by applying the basic terms and conditions for credit transaction with the Defendant (hereinafter “the basic terms and conditions in this case”). From September 30, 2014, the Defendant delayed interest on the loan principal.
[Grounds for recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2-1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that: (a) the Defendant did not pay interest on the principal of the loan and the interest thereon; and (b) the Plaintiff is obliged to pay the interest on the principal of the loan and the damages for delay from September 30, 2014 to May 11, 2015, in total, KRW 36,582,889, and ② to pay the interest on the principal of the loan and the damages for delay from May 12, 2015 to the date of full payment.
B. The special contract for the loss of the benefit of one time period is classified into two parts: the special contract for the loss of the benefit of one time period, which naturally causes the loss of the benefit of the time period and the arrival of the due date, and the special contract for the loss of the benefit of one time period, which provides that the due date shall arrive when the obligee acts, such as the obligee's notice or claim, after certain causes have occurred; and whether the special contract for the loss of the benefit of the time period falls under any one of the two cases, is a matter of interpretation of the intent of the parties, but in general, the special contract for the loss of the benefit of the time period is a special contract for the loss of the benefit of the time period.