beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On December 24, 1997, the Defendant received a loan with the interest rate of KRW 40 million per annum, KRW 14% per annum, KRW 22% per annum, and the due date of payment on December 24, 1998 (hereinafter “instant loan”).
B. On September 21, 200, Kimcheon-dong Saemaul Savings Depository was merged into Kimcheon-nam Saemaul Savings Depository. On January 26, 2007, Kimcheon-nam Saemaul Savings Depository transferred the principal and interest of the instant loan to the Korean Federation of Saemaul Savings Depository, and on April 18, 2014, the Korean Federation of Saemaul Savings Depository once again transferred it to the Plaintiff. The Korean Federation of Saemaul Savings Depository was the agent of the first transferor Kimcheon-nam Saemaul Savings Depository, and notified the Defendant of each of the above assignment of claims.
C. The principal of the instant loan is KRW 39,989,460, and interest and delay damages are KRW 68,870,930 at the time the Plaintiff received the loan.
[Grounds for recognition] The items in Gap's evidence Nos. 1 to 4, Gap's evidence Nos. 6 and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Assertion and determination
A. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay the principal and interest of the instant loan to the Plaintiff, except in extenuating circumstances.
B. On this ground, the Defendant asserted that the statute of limitations expired. As seen earlier, the Defendant’s claim for the instant loan has expired. The Plaintiff’s claim for the instant loan has been filed on December 24, 1998, and it is apparent that the Plaintiff’s claim for the instant loan was filed on December 22, 2014, and thus, the statute of limitations expired before the instant lawsuit was filed. The Defendant’s defense has merit. 2) As to this, the Plaintiff’s claim for the instant loan was extinguished on October 25, 2006, prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations, since the Defendant repaid KRW 10,540 on October 25, 2006, the period of the said statute of limitations expired.
The effect that the debtor who is the party to whom the prescription benefits has been granted is aware of the other party's right or obligation to the other party or his/her agent, due to the completion of extinctive prescription.