beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 29.6 million and the Plaintiff’s annual rate from May 20, 2016 to February 9, 2017, as follows.
Reasons
1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each of the statements in Gap evidence No. 1-1-4, Gap evidence No. 2-1-2, and Eul evidence No. 2-2, the plaintiff lent to the defendant the total amount of KRW 20 million on June 20, 2012, KRW 19.6 million on September 1, 2012, KRW 39.6 million on the loan (hereinafter "the loan of this case"). The defendant may recognize the fact that he/she paid KRW 10 million on July 17, 2013 to the plaintiff out of the loan principal, and there is no counter-proof.
According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of 29.6 million won (i.e., KRW 19.6 million) and the damages for delay calculated by applying each rate of 15% per annum as stipulated by the Civil Act from May 20, 2016 to February 9, 2017, the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, which is the day after the delivery of the Plaintiff, to the day after the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case, to the day after the decision of this case, to the day after the delivery of the Defendant’s performance of the obligation.
2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. As to this, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the loan of this case was agreed between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff to accept the debt, and accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a criminal complaint against C including the above amount, and received the loan certificate and the Notarial Deed from C.
The acceptance of the obligation should be regarded as a discharge acceptance, or if it is not clear whether there is an overlapping acceptance, it should be regarded as an overlapping acceptance.
(Supreme Court Decision 87Meu3104 Decided May 24, 198). In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement in the evidence No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, No. 4 of the evidence No. 2, and No. 2 of the evidence No. 1, No. 1, No. 3, and No. 2 of the evidence No. 2, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the Plaintiff on the acquisition of KRW 198,77 million from the Plaintiff, who is the Defendant’s her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her she was included in the loan amount of KRW 198,700,000,000,000 won.