beta
Text
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 125,00,000 and as to the Plaintiff from February 2, 2013 to November 2, 2014.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff loaned KRW 200 million to Defendant B on September 28, 201 by setting the due date as December 28, 201, and loaned KRW 45 million on September 30, 201 as the due date for repayment set as December 30, 201, and Defendant C guaranteed Defendant B’s obligation for Defendant B’s borrowed money. There is no dispute between the parties.
2. The parties' assertion
A. In addition to the above KRW 245 million, the Plaintiff asserted that Defendant B lent a total of KRW 275 million to Defendant B on December 8, 2011. Defendant B paid KRW 375 million in addition to the interest. Defendant B paid KRW 100 million in addition to the above KRW 375 million. Defendant C guaranteed the above obligation.
The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 125 million, excluding the amount paid to the Plaintiff by the Plaintiff, and interest and delay damages.
B. Defendant B’s assertion 1) The Defendant did not have any additional loan of KRW 30 million from the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff on September 28, 2011. (2) There was no interest agreement with respect to the loan of KRW 200 million on September 30, 2011. The interest agreement was made on September 30, 201 with respect to the loan of KRW 45 million. The portion exceeding the Interest Limitation Act is null and void. From April 6, 2012 to January 19, 2015, the Defendant repaid KRW 235 million to the Plaintiff.
3. Determination
A. In full view of the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 6, 7, and 9 (including each number, if any) to determine whether to grant a loan of KRW 30 million and the existence of a interest agreement, and the purport of witness Eul's testimony and the entire pleadings, the plaintiff loaned KRW 30 million to D on November 15, 201, and Eul paid KRW 30 million to the defendant Eul on December 8, 2011. The following circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence, namely, D and the defendant stated that Eul provided a loan of KRW 30 million from the plaintiff to the defendant Eul instead of paying the plaintiff KRW 30 million from the plaintiff, and D and the defendant stated that Eul loaned money from the plaintiff to the defendant Eul on December 8, 201.