Changwon Loaned Money Attorney | A Case in Which a Claim for Return of a Loan Was Filed Against a Defendant Who Refused to Repay, Resulting in Full Recovery

The Changwon loan claim attorney's client was running a restaurant together with a friend.

The client's friend agreed to borrow money from the client under the name of business funds.

The client transferred approximately 40 million won to the friend by account transfer. In borrowing this 40 million won, the friend reportedly agreed to pay interest monthly, calculated at an annual rate of 6%.

As time passed and the client demanded the return of the loaned money, the friend returned only 500,000 won and kept putting off payment day after day.

Moreover, the friend had agreed to pay the client interest calculated at an annual rate of 6%, but paid it for only about two months and has not paid any interest since.

As a result, the Changwon loan claim attorney's client came to file this lawsuit in order to recover the client's money.

The friend against whom the Changwon loan claim attorney's client filed the lawsuit claimed to have never borrowed money from the client.

The friend stated that the 40 million won the client referred to was merely money invested for a business partnership, that there was no borrowing, and that there had never been any agreement to pay interest.

The Changwon loan claim attorney received full authority over the lawsuit from the client and filed a complaint for a claim for return of a loan containing the following purport of claim.

1. The defendant shall pay the plaintiff 40,000,000 won and an amount calculated at an annual rate of 12% on that sum from the date the duplicate of the complaint in this case is served until the date of full repayment.

The friend against whom the Changwon loan claim attorney's client filed the lawsuit submitted an investment contract as evidence.

The investment contract in question contained the statement that the client would ‘invest’ 40 million won.

The investment contract, which was the friend's only physical evidence, lacked a signature and seal and was therefore nothing more than an invalid contract.

According to the KakaoTalk message conversation exchanged between the Changwon loan claim attorney's client and the friend, when the client demanded the interest and the return of the loaned money, the friend responded with a tone asking the client to wait.

In addition, the friend used the KakaoTalk money transfer function to send the client an amount corresponding to the interest once each over two months.

It is reasonable to view that, although only for two months, the friend paid the client an amount equivalent to the interest on the loaned money.