beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 50,000,000 and its amount shall be 30% per annum from September 9, 2009 to July 14, 2014 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff’s husband C, around April 9, 2009, set the interest rate of KRW 50 million and lent to the Defendant at 3% per month on and around April 9, 2009, is not a dispute between the parties. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement in subparagraph 1, the Plaintiff, on June 1, 2009, prepared a certificate of borrowing that “the Plaintiff shall regularly borrow the above KRW 50 million, pay the monthly interest in three copies, and pay the interest from May 9, 2009.”
According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 30% per annum for the Plaintiff within the scope of the above agreement from September 9, 2009 to July 14, 2014, which was sought by the Plaintiff, and the interest or delay damages calculated at the rate of 25% per annum for the Plaintiff from the next day to the day of full payment.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The defendant, together with C, invested the factory site located in Chungcheongbuk D, and paid KRW 50 million out of the defendant's investment funds as the loan of this case. The defendant asserted that C transferred the defendant's above investment shares of KRW 50 million to C in lieu of repayment of the above loan, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that the above transfer had been made. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
B. The Defendant asserts that C’s claim against the Defendant is unreasonable, but it is not sufficient to accept the statement (including the serial number) in the evidence No. 5, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. The Defendant’s assertion is without merit, since C returned the investment funds to the above site including the loan of this case through civil litigation (Cheongju District Court 2014Gahap3344) between E, etc., the seller of the above site.
3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable and acceptable.