beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 27,00,000 as well as to the Plaintiff’s KRW 5% per annum from August 31, 2012 to September 30, 2015 and from the next day.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff, from May 2009, operates an electrical construction company as a partnership with the Defendant from around May 2009.
Around November 2011, the fact that the partnership relationship was terminated, and the defendant prepared a certificate of borrowing (a evidence No. 1; hereinafter referred to as the "certificate of borrowing of this case") that KRW 27,000,000 from the settlement of accounts to the plaintiff on May 9, 2012, that the plaintiff shall be paid until August 30, 2012, may be recognized pursuant to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and evidence No. 2-1 through 11 and all pleadings.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the above KRW 27,00,000 as well as damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from August 31, 2012 to September 30, 2015, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks.
2. The Defendant’s argument regarding the Defendant is asserting that the settlement amount is about KRW 10 million in consideration of various expenses, etc. incurred by the Plaintiff. However, if the authenticity of the disposal document is acknowledged, the court should, in principle, recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposal document, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof to deny the contents of the statement (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Da15816, Sept. 20, 2007). The statement in Eul evidence No. 1 alone lacks to reverse the above contents recognized by the loan certificate of this case, which is a disposal document, and there is no counter-proof to the contrary. Thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.
3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.