1. Analysis of Private Lending Cases

1. This case occurred before the promulgation of the "Regulations of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Private Lending Cases" in 2015, and the regulations at that time shall apply. .

2. At that time, it was stipulated that interest rates exceeding four times the bank loan interest rate were not protected. Not protected does not mean illegal. If the defendant voluntarily pays a monthly interest of 4 or 5, no matter whether it is higher than 4 times the bank loan interest rate, no action will be taken, the act will be deemed to be valid, and the defendant shall not claim for deduction or clawback.

3. The issue of unpaid interest and principal. Unpaid interest will be supported at 4 times the current bank loan interest rate, and the principal will be refunded. Since the plaintiff only claimed that interest should be calculated based on the benchmark loan interest rate for the same period, which was a disposition of the rights of the parties and did not violate the law, this court supports it.

To sum up, the judgment is as follows: Within 10 days since this judgment takes effect, the defendant Chen will return the loan principal of 7 million yuan; pay interest of ×× yuan (calculated from x month to x year × month to date, interest will be calculated based on the bank loan interest rate for the same period), and subsequent interest will be calculated to the date when this judgment takes effect. If the defendant fails to pay the principal and interest according to this judgment, he shall pay a penalty equal to twice the loan interest rate for the same period. ?

2. Private lending (the case is very complicated)

My friend, would you like to ask if such a large amount of money is important to you? If it wasn't important, you wouldn't be on it, right? But I feel that you are sick and seek medical treatment indiscriminately. How can you come to ask questions online? Do you know what your people do? Do you know who he is? It can be said that as long as I know better than you, I can give you advice. But this kind of case is a once-in-a-trial case. It doesn’t mean that if you say something wrong this time, you can do it next time. With such a professional and a large amount of money, why don't you find an experienced person and just trust netizens? If your own teaching fees are involved in a lawsuit, will it lower your standard of living? If it doesn't lower your living standard, just find a lawyer. Explain your situation to a lawyer in detail and see what the lawyer's opinion is. Don't think that a lawyer can talk nonsense. A lawyer must be responsible. If it's not what he said, will you give him the money? In addition, for this kind of professional matters, it can be said that few people use your legal assistance. There are also caring and free lawyers. If you are afraid of spending money, you can also turn to the local media to help introduce legal services and consultations. In short, no one with life experience and mature thinking would use your method. Because netizens can talk nonsense but you don’t understand anyway. If you did, you wouldn’t ask. It is recommended that you do not focus on maximizing profits.

3. Organizational lending cases?

Private lending includes legal persons, natural persons, and some are called special legal persons, that is, governments or non-profit organizations. Village collective organizations, as the most basic mass autonomous organizations in our country, also have private lending. If The village collective borrows money from the private sector for its own construction and development. If it is unable to repay or has other circumstances, how should the responsibilities be divided? Today, we will make a brief analysis based on the second-instance civil judgment of Zhu Moushi and Zhu Mouzhang on private lending on November 30, 2020 by the Intermediate People's Court of Linyi City, Shandong Province.

1. Basic situation of the case and judgment results

Facts found in the first instance: Zhu Mouzhang and Zhu Mouzhen are residents of Zhuhuangyu Village, Yushan Town, Linshu County, and Zhu Mouzhang serves as a villager Accountant, Zhu actually serves as village branch secretary. From March 15, 2015 to April 2018, Zhu Moushi borrowed money from Zhu Mouzhang many times, and the two parties settled the loan. Zhu Moushi issued two IOUs to Zhu Mouzhang in April 2018. The first IOU states: Zhu Mou actually borrowed 24,900 yuan in cash from Zhu Zhang; the period is from April 2018 to April 2019; the second IOU stated that Zhu actually borrowed 14,800 yuan in cash from Zhu Zhang ; The period is from March 15, 2015 to March 15, 2019, and note that the loan is for village use, 10,000 yuan plus interest of 4,800 yuan. Zhu Zhang stated that the above-mentioned loans were all paid in cash, and he believed that Zhu had repaid the loan of 13,000 yuan after issuing the IOU. The remaining loan amount of 26,700 yuan was demanded by Zhu Zhang, but Zhu actually failed to repay it.

The first instance held that the fact that Zhu actually borrowed money from Zhu Zhang was mutually supported by the IOU signed by him and the fact of repayment, and the loan had been actually delivered and the loan contract had come into effect. The first instance confirmed that Zhu If the loan is actually not repaid according to the time stipulated in the loan, the repayment obligation should continue to be performed and the remaining loan of 26,700 yuan should be paid off. If the IOU does not stipulate interest, it will be deemed that no interest has been paid. The date of Zhu's chapter is the day when the grace period for him to require Zhu to perform his obligations expires. Zhu Zhang claimed that the interest loss could be calculated at an annual interest rate of 6 from that date. The defendant Zhu's refusal to appear in court to participate in the proceedings despite being subpoenaed will be deemed to have given up the right to defend, which will not affect the judgment of the first instance based on the facts ascertained. Judgment of the first instance: Defendant Zhu Moushi shall return the loan of 26,700 yuan and interest to plaintiff Zhu Mouzhang within ten days from the date of entry into force of this judgment (based on 26,700 yuan, from April 29, 2020 to the date of actual payment, based on The annual interest rate is calculated at 6). The case acceptance fee of 468 yuan was reduced by half to 234 yuan, which was borne by the defendant Zhu Moushi.

In the second trial, the parties did not submit new evidence.

The facts proved by the second examination are consistent with the facts proved by the original examination.

This court believes that Article 90 of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's People's Republic of China on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China" stipulates that: the parties shall not refute the facts or rebuttals on which their claims are based. The facts on which the other party's claims are based must be supported by evidence, unless otherwise provided by law. Before a judgment is made, if a party fails to provide evidence or the evidence is insufficient to prove its factual claims, the party with the burden of proof shall bear the adverse consequences. The appellant Zhu Shi claimed that the loan involved in the case had been repaid to 6,000 yuan, and was repaid to the respondent Zhu Mozhang's sister-in-law Yuan Di. The respondent Zhu Mozhang did not agree, and Yuan Di also explained in court that the 6,000 yuan was the appellant Zhu's. A certain person actually repaid other debts between him and Yuan Di, so this court will not support this. The appellant Zhu Moushi claimed that the loan involved in the case was a loan from the village committee, but did not provide evidence to prove his claim, so this court did not support the appeal.

To sum up, Zhu Moushi’s appeal request cannot be established and should be rejected; the first-instance judgment found the facts clearly and applied the law correctly and should be upheld. In accordance with the provisions of Article 170, Paragraph 1, Item 1, of the Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, the judgment is as follows:

The appeal is dismissed and the original judgment is upheld.

II. Main legal basis and practical analysis of the judgment

1. The Civil Code includes legal persons of government agencies, legal persons of rural collective economic organizations, legal persons of urban and rural cooperative economic organizations, and grassroots mass autonomy An organizational legal person is a special legal person. This is also a key point in this case.

2. The appellant wanted to argue that the loan was for the village collective organization and not for himself, but in terms of the loan relationship, both parties signed the loan and only noted that it was for the village, but did not provide evidence to prove it. There is a lack of strong evidence. If the collective organization borrows money, it should provide evidence that the village collective organization uses the funds, but it is not provided, so there is no support.

3. According to the law, the village collective organization, as a special legal person, can carry out civil activities and bear civil liabilities. The village director, as the representative of the village collective, can borrow money on behalf of the village collective organization, but the borrowing needs to be used for the village. Collective organization, otherwise it cannot be recognized as village collective borrowing.

4. Another one, because there is no agreed interest, it is deemed that no interest will be paid, but the settlement will be based on the bank interest rate at that time from that date until the loan is paid off. This is a loan between natural persons.

5. If the interest agreement on a loan between legal persons is unclear and the lender claims to pay interest, the people will not support it. Except for loans between natural persons, if the loan interest agreement between the borrower and the borrower is unclear and the lender claims interest, the people should determine the interest based on the content of the private loan contract and the local or party transaction methods, transaction habits, market interest rates and other factors. ”

6. Interest is the reward for temporarily giving up the right to use money. It is the compensation for the lender’s promise not to withdraw the loaned currency before a certain time. The interest rate is used as The ratio of interest to principal is regarded as the price of money as a commodity. The real source of interest is the actual growth of the economy.

7. If there is no agreed interest on a loan between natural persons or if there is an agreement but the agreement is unclear, the interest will be deemed not to be paid. If there is no agreement on interest between borrowers and lenders, including natural persons, non-financial legal persons or other organizations, and their mutual financing activities, the lender's claim for interest during the loan period shall not be supported. Because, compared with natural persons, non-financial legal persons and other organizations generally have higher abilities to engage in civil and commercial activities, risk prevention capabilities and judgments about market expectations. Enterprises are the best judge of their own interests. If they want to obtain interest, they should It is clearly stipulated in the loan contract. If it is not stipulated, it will be deemed that the lender has no intention to pursue interest or the parties have not reached an agreement to pay interest.

8. When only one of the borrowers and lenders is a natural person or both parties are non-financial institutions, legal persons or other organizations, if the interest agreement is unclear, in terms of its essence, the loopholes in the contract should be filled, in the following order and standard processing:

9. According to Article 61 of the "Contract Law", it can be determined based on the relevant terms of the contract or transaction practices. In addition, pay attention to the three conditions for determining the interest rate applicable to transaction methods and trading habits: ① In terms of objective conditions, it should be the practice commonly adopted in the local area or industry where the transaction occurs; ② In terms of subjective conditions, the counterparty knows or should know, so as to Strengthen the protection of counterparties who do not understand local customs or lack experience in the industry; ③ Judging from the time point of transaction habits, it should be a customary practice that was known or should be known when the contract was entered into.

10. If it still cannot be determined in accordance with Article 61 of the "Contract Law", the judgment shall be made in accordance with the provisions of Article 62 of the "Contract Law". That is, when the interest agreement between a non-financial institution legal person and other organizations is unclear, the interest can be calculated based on the same loan interest rate for the same period at the commercial bank in the place where the contract is performed when the private loan contract is concluded.

11. In the case of "unagreed interest", two conditions must be met: the borrower and the lender dispute the existence of interest; both parties have no evidence to prove their claims, although there is the word "agreement", However, if there is no agreement on interest and it is difficult to form a preponderant evidence, the essence is still a state of no agreement on interest.

12. If the two parties do not agree on interest during the loan period, and even if there is no agreement on overdue interest, the lender can still claim that the borrower pays overdue repayment interest from the date the loan is overdue to the date of repayment. The interest losses during the period when the borrower repays the occupied funds can be calculated with reference to the People's Bank of China's benchmark interest rate for similar loans for the same period.

IV. Top Ten Cases of Private Lending

Private lending refers to lending between citizens, between citizens and legal persons, and between citizens and other organizations. Private lending is a direct Financing channels and investment channels are a form of private finance. As a financing method with rich resources, simple and flexible operation, private lending continues to develop in the market economy, which to a certain extent alleviates the contradiction of insufficient bank credit funds and promotes economic development. Below I have compiled the top ten cases of private lending for your reference.

Private Lending Case 1

Illegal lending is not protected

[Case Facts] On April 11, 2001, Wang was at his home in Ciyutuo Town, Liaozhong County There was a bet on the draw, and Shen and others came to Wang's house to gamble. During gambling, Shen borrowed 40,000 yuan in gambling capital from Wang and signed the IOU, agreeing to repay the money before April 15 of the same year. But after the loan expired, Shen refused to repay it despite Wang's repeated reminders. Wang had no choice but to file a lawsuit. Wang’s lawsuit was dismissed.

[Judge’s statement] Han Hua, the presiding judge of the First Citizen’s Court: Wang set up a gambling game at his home to draw red money, and even though he knew Shen was losing money, he still lent money to Shen to continue gambling. His lending relationship is not protected by law. .

[Judge’s reminder] Legitimate civil rights are protected by law. If the lender knows that the borrower is still borrowing money for illegal activities such as gambling, smuggling, drug trafficking, or trafficking, it is illegal lending, and the lending relationship is not protected by law.

Private lending case 2

The statute of limitations cannot be exceeded

[Case Facts] When Wu was serving as the director of Da Lama Township, Xinmin City, on August 13, 1998 On the same day, he borrowed 10,000 yuan from the township government finance office in his own name, agreeing to repay on October 1, without agreeing on interest. But Wu never returned it since then. The township government arrived on December 27, 2002. The township government's lawsuit was dismissed.

[Judge’s Statement] Judge Zhao Menghui of the First Citizen’s Court: When the township government asserted its rights, it exceeded the two-year statute of limitations stipulated by law. Although the township government claimed that it had repeatedly demanded payment of arrears, Wu denied this and the township government did not provide evidence to prove it. Therefore, the township government's claim cannot be established.

[Judge’s Reminder] The General Principles of my country’s Civil Law stipulates that the statute of limitations for petitioning the people for protection of civil rights is 2 years, and the statute of limitations is calculated from the time when the person knew or should have known that the rights had been infringed. Private loan cases are subject to a 2-year statute of limitations. Because some lenders do not know this provision or are out of favor and do not want to hurt their goodwill, they fail to promptly and effectively collect the debt within the effective period, resulting in the failure to realize the creditor's rights. Therefore, the parties concerned must strengthen self-protection, pay attention to reminders after the repayment period expires, and make timely payments to protect their legal claims from being realized.

Private lending case three

There is a limit on loan interest

[Case Facts] On August 14, 2003, Hu borrowed 100,000 yuan from Ma. The two parties agreed that the loan interest rate would be calculated based on a monthly interest rate of 2 cents, and Hu should fulfill his repayment obligations before August 14, 2004. But the principal and interest have never been repaid. Hu is sentenced to return the loan, and the interest will be calculated at four times the bank's loan interest rate for the same period during the loan period.

[Judge’s Statement] Judge Zhao Zhi of the First Citizen’s Court: Because the loan interest agreed by both parties is higher than 4 times the loan interest rate of the People’s Bank of China for the same period, the law does not protect the portion exceeding 4 times.

[Judge reminds] In private lending relationships, the most likely conflict between borrowers and lenders is interest. According to Article 6 of the Supreme People's "Several Opinions on the People's Trial of Loan Cases": the interest rate for private loans can be appropriately higher than the bank interest rate, but the maximum cannot exceed four times the bank's loan interest rate for the same period, and the excess interest will not be protected. It also stipulates that for loans between citizens, the lender will include the interest into the principal to calculate compound interest, that is, "interest compounding", and will not be protected. In addition, Paragraph 1 of Article 211 of the Contract Law stipulates: If a loan contract between natural persons does not stipulate interest or the stipulation is unclear, it shall be deemed that no interest has been paid. Therefore, in private lending, the agreement on interest must comply with legal provisions and must be clearly agreed.

Private lending case four

The borrower must be clear

[Case Facts] Li is a villager in a village in Liaozhong County, and the director of the village committee Wang found him Borrowed 5,000 yuan and issued an IOU stating that the borrower was the director of the village committee. Later, Li asked Wang for money, and Wang asked him to go to the village committee to ask for it. Li asked the village committee to return the loan but was rejected. Li took the village committee to court. dismissed its claim.

[Judge’s Statement] Judge Chen Guiyan of the First Citizen’s Court: Because the village committee director issued an IOU without the official seal of the village committee, his behavior was non-official, and it is obviously inappropriate for Li to sue the village committee. .

[Judge reminds] Lenders must find out whether the other party is borrowing money as a natural person or performing duties in an official capacity to identify the borrower. What needs to be reminded is that if the borrower is a legal person and the borrower is affixed with the official seal of the company, the lender should sue the company in the lawsuit, not the natural person.

Private lending case five

State the purpose to prevent repudiation

[Case Facts] In the following year starting from March 25, 2003, Yang successively He borrowed money from Wei three times, totaling 76,000 yuan, and stated the purpose of the loan and the repayment time. However, after the loan expired, Wei repeatedly pressed for payment, but Yang failed to repay. During this period, the two parties had a dispute over the sale of the house. Yang believes that two of the IOUs were caused by the sale of houses. The payment for the existing houses has been settled and he should not repay them. However, the two IOUs issued by Wei stated that the purpose of the loan was to borrow money for renting a bed, borrowing money for urgent supplies, and for children's schooling. It was ordered that Yang should return the money owed by Wei.

[Judge’s statement] Song Ning, the presiding judge of the First Citizen’s Tribunal: Both parties gave different explanations of the IOU. The existence of the loan can only be determined based on the records in the IOU. Since Yang's litigation claim is inconsistent with the content recorded in the IOU, it will not be supported.

[Judge reminds] The written agreement between the lender and the borrower should specify the name of the lender and the borrower, currency, amount, purpose, term, interest rate, repayment method, liability for breach of contract, etc. For a loan request made by others, the lender must ask the other party for the purpose of the loan and decide whether to borrow or not. If the lender knows that the borrower is borrowing money for illegal activities such as gambling, it is not protected by the law.

Private Lending Case 6

No written evidence, "empty words"

[Case Facts] Wang and Dong are friends. On February 18 last year, Wang asked Dong on the phone: "When will the 7,000 yuan I borrowed be repaid?" Dong replied: "I don't owe the money. I am paying back the money for the person named Wei. I don't have to pay back the money." You have to pay back the money." Wang secretly recorded the call and used this as evidence to take Dong to court. Wang’s claim was dismissed.

[Judge’s statement] Song Gang, the presiding judge of the First Citizen’s Tribunal: The content of the recorded phone call provided by Wang can only reflect the situation in which he claimed credit against Dong, but cannot fully and truly reflect the disputes disputed by the parties. facts, as well as the rights and obligations between them. Wang wanted to prove the existence of the loan with Dong by using recording evidence, but he refused to accept it.

[Judge’s reminder] In real life, most private lending occurs between relatives and friends. Because these people usually have close relationships, out of trust or due to affection, private lending relationships are often based on The agreement was entered into verbally without any written evidence. In this case, once one party denies it, the other party will be in a state of "empty talk" because it cannot produce evidence. Even if the lawsuit is brought, the lender will lose the case because it cannot provide evidence. According to Article 4 of the Supreme People's "Several Opinions on the People's Trial of Loan Cases": When the people review a loan case, the plaintiff should be required to provide written evidence; if there is no written evidence, necessary factual evidence should be provided. Applications that do not meet the above conditions will be deemed inadmissible. It can be seen that it is necessary for the lender and the borrower to enter into a written agreement.

Private Lending Case 7

There is an argument for movable property pledge

[Case Facts] On August 21, 2002, Liu signed a contract with a car rental company in Shenyang Self-driving car rental contract, the contract stipulates that the lease period is one year. However, a month later, Liu pledged the car to Zhao, borrowed 200,000 yuan from him, and agreed to repay the money and pick up the car. Liu failed to pay the car rental fee to the leasing company as scheduled, and the leasing company learned that the car had been pledged by Liu to others and used for gambling. The leasing company immediately reported the incident. The public security department returned the car from Zhao to the leasing company. Zhao believed that his interests had been damaged and requested that Liu be ordered to repay the money and that the public security department bear joint liability. It was only decided that Liu should repay the money.

[Judge’s Statement] Judge Guo Jing of the First Citizen’s Court: Liu pledged the vehicle in exchange for a loan knowing that the leased vehicle was not allowed to be pledged, and his behavior violated the relevant provisions of the "Security Law" , the pledge should be deemed invalid. However, the legal relationship in which he borrowed money from Zhao was legal and valid and protected by law, and Zhao did not know that Liu was using it for gambling when he borrowed the money. Therefore, the judgment was made that Liu should return Zhao's loan. Since the public security department is performing its duties by seizing the car and returning it to the owner, it does not have to bear joint and several liability for repayment.

[Judge reminder] Zhao suffered a big loss because he did not carefully review the pledged property. For a pledge of movable property such as a car, the debtor must be the owner of the movable property. If the movable property is owned by a third party, the pledge must obtain his or her consent. A pledge contract should be concluded in writing. It is best to establish a guarantee for large loans, and the guarantee must comply with legal regulations.

Private Lending Case 8

The debtor must be notified when transferring creditor's rights

[Case Facts] On February 6, 2002, he borrowed 440,000 yuan from a company. Agreed to return within one year. Later, Xiang lent the loan to Qiu, but Qiu did not return the loan.

On May 6, 2003, the borrowing company transferred all the creditor's rights to Liu. Now Liu will take Xiang to court. However, Xiang believed that the loan could not be returned to Liu on the grounds that the creditor's rights were transferred without notifying him and without his consent, so the transfer was invalid. The judgment was made to return 440,000 yuan to Liu.

[Judge’s Statement] Judge Zhang Hongjun of the First Citizen’s Court: The focus of the dispute in this case is whether the creditor’s rights transfer agreement is valid. As for Xiang's claim that the transfer agreement did not obtain his consent and the transfer of creditor's rights has no legal effect on him, because Liu has already filed a lawsuit, the time when the pleading should be served on the debtor according to relevant regulations is the notification time. At this time, the creditor's rights are transferred. Have legal effect on the debtor. The debtor shall perform its debts to the assignee, and this effect is not premised on the debtor's commitment. Now Liu holds the creditor's rights transfer agreement of the borrowing company and the original IOU issued to Xiang, which can prove the fact of the transfer of creditor's rights, so Xiang's claim is not supported.

[Judge’s reminder] Creditors need to be reminded that if a creditor transfers its creditor’s rights, it must notify the debtor. The notification method can be an oral notification or a written notification. Without notification, the transfer will not be effective against the debtor.

Private Lending Case 9

Minor loans should also be repaid

[Case Facts] Xiao Rong and Xiao Ming are classmates, they are both only 13 years old. Starting from March 22 last year, Xiao Ming successively lent Xiao Rong 2,800 yuan. But when Xiao Ming asked Xiao Rong to pay back the money, Xiao Rong was unable to pay back the money. There was no other way, so both parties had no choice but to ask their parents to come forward to discuss the matter. However, Xiaorong's parents believed that the facts of the loan were unclear and there was no relevant evidence to prove the fact of the loan, so they refused to repay the loan. The court ordered Xiao Rong to return the 2,800 yuan borrowed by Xiao Ming.

[Judge’s statement] Mingyue, the presiding judge of the First Citizen Tribunal: As persons with limited capacity for conduct, Xiao Rong and Xiao Ming cannot independently carry out the civil act of borrowing 2,800 yuan according to law, and their acts are invalid. According to legal provisions, the property obtained by one party from the other party based on invalid civil acts should be returned to the other party, so Xiaorong should return the loan. Xiao Ming and Xiao Rong reported the loan between them to the school teacher, which can prove the fact that the loan existed.

[Judge’s reminder] As adults with guardianship responsibilities, they must fulfill their guardianship responsibilities towards minors to prevent unnecessary occurrences.

Private Lending Case 10

The creditor died of illness and the creditor's rights belong to the heirs

[Case Facts] Wang began to contract in Qianzuo Village, Dahei Township, Liaozhong County in 2003 land. Li advanced 3,910 yuan for the land contract for Wang, and the village committee issued a receipt for the payment. On June 23, 2003, Wang issued a receipt to Li stating that he owed 3,910 yuan. Later, Wang returned 2,000 yuan, leaving him with a debt of 1,910 yuan, despite repeated requests to no avail. On June 16, 2005, Li filed a lawsuit. But on November 6 of that year, during the litigation, Li died of illness. Should Wang still repay the debt?

[Judge’s statement] During the litigation, if one party dies and there is an heir, the lawsuit is ruled to be suspended. . The people should promptly notify the heirs to assume the litigation as a party, and the litigation actions already carried out by the deceased are valid for the heirs undertaking the litigation. Therefore, it was ordered that Wang should return the debt to the legal heir.

[Judge reminds] When the creditor dies, the heirs will inherit the creditor's rights. If the debtor dies, the heir should first pay off the decedent's debt when inheriting the estate, and the debt repayment is limited to the actual value of the estate. This does not apply to the amount that exceeds the actual value of the estate and is voluntarily repaid by the heirs. The heir can also give up the inheritance and be not responsible for the debts of the deceased.

Judicial Interpretation of Private Lending

Private lending is not only an economic phenomenon, but also a legal phenomenon, with the following main legal characteristics:

(1)Private lending is a civil legal act. The lender and the borrower form a specific creditor-debt relationship by signing a written loan agreement or reaching an oral agreement, thereby generating corresponding rights and obligations. The creditor-debt relationship is an important part of my country's civil legal relations. Once this relationship is formed, it is protected by law.

(2) Private lending is a contractual act between the lender and the borrower.

Whether the borrower and the lender form a lending relationship, as well as the loan amount, loan subject matter, loan period, etc., depend on the written or oral agreement between the lender and the borrower. As long as the content of the agreement is legal, it is allowed and protected by law.

(3) The prerequisite for the establishment of a private lending relationship is the actual payment of the loaned object. Whether a lending relationship is formed between the borrower and the lender, in addition to agreeing on the loan subject matter, amount, repayment period, etc., the lender is also required to deliver currency or other securities to the borrower, so that the lending relationship is formally established.

(4) The subject matter of private lending must be property that the lender personally owns or has the right to control. A lending relationship formed by property that does not belong to the lender or that the lender has no right to control is invalid and not protected by law.

(5) Private lending can be paid or free. Whether it is paid or not is decided by the borrower and the lender. Only if a payment is agreed in advance in a written or oral agreement, the lender can require the borrower to pay interest when repaying the principal. Legal Characteristics of Private Lending Private lending is not only a legal phenomenon, but also an economic and legal phenomenon.