beta
Text
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 3,594,680 as well as its full payment from March 28, 2007.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On July 24, 2006, the Defendant borrowed KRW 4,050,00 from Nonparty C Co., Ltd. at an interest rate of KRW 39% per annum, delay damages rate of KRW 39% per annum, and the loan period of October 21, 2008 (hereinafter “claim of this case”) and delayed the repayment of the instant loan from March 28, 2007.
B. On February 22, 2008, C Co., Ltd transferred the instant loan claim to Nonparty D Co., Ltd., and around March 20, 2014, C Co., Ltd notified the Defendant of the transfer of the claim by content-certified mail.
C. On October 14, 2008, D Co., Ltd. filed an application with the Defendant for the payment order of the acquisition amount under Seoul Central District Court 2008Guj81132, and on October 23, 2008, the above court ordered D Co., Ltd. to pay the amount of KRW 6,056,602 as well as KRW 3,594,680 as per annum from September 18, 2008 to the date of full payment. The above order was served on the Defendant on February 12, 2009 and became final and conclusive on February 27, 2009.
(hereinafter referred to as “previous executive title”). D.
D Co., Ltd. transferred the claim for the instant loan to the Plaintiff on February 22, 2014, and around March 20, 2014, notified the Defendant of the transfer of the claim by content-certified mail.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2, 3, 6 through 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff, the final transferee of the claim for the loan of this case, interest and delay damages calculated by the agreement rate of 3,594,680 won remaining principal of the loan of this case and the rate of 39% per annum, which are the overdue interest rate from March 28, 2007 to the date of complete payment, unless there are special circumstances.
The plaintiff is entitled to the benefit of protecting the rights of the lawsuit of this case in order to suspend extinctive prescription of the claim based on the previous executive title.
3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's objection.