beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 31,50,000 won and 15% interest per annum from June 17, 2017 to the day of complete payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a business operator who registered his business with the trade name of “C” and sells clothing. The Plaintiff received KRW 31,500,000 from the Defendant for the first time to pay KRW 31,50,000 from the Defendant, and received KRW 31,50,000 from the Defendant for the payment of KRW 31,50,000 from the Defendant on October 8, 2007, and received a certified promissory note on November 5, 2007.
B. On March 15, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 7,00,000 as a crime of fraud from the Suwon District Court Ansan Branch Branch, which was issued by deceiving the Plaintiff that he would produce and deliver clothings upon making advance payment of expenses to the Plaintiff, and received the said money from the Plaintiff.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of whole pleadings.
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff a loan of KRW 31,500,000 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from June 17, 2017 to the date of full payment after the original copy of the instant payment order was served on the Defendant, as the Plaintiff seeks.
B. The defendant's argument regarding the defendant's assertion was requested by the plaintiff for the production of nitrote in violation of the trademark right. When the control was strengthened in the production process and the production was delayed, the above notarial deed was prepared as forced by the plaintiff, and thus the above notarial deed is null and void, or even if it is not so, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the remainder except for the manufacturing cost of nitrote supplied as above, but the above notarial deed is not accepted as there is no evidence to acknowledge the defendant's argument.
3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is reasonable and acceptable.