청구이의
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. Basic facts on January 17, 2017: (a) the Plaintiff, the Defendant, C, and C borrowed KRW 55 million from the Defendant; and (b) C borrowed this in installments from January 17, 2017 to the end of August 2017; and (c) in cases where repayment of principal or interest is delayed, 15% of the annual damages for delay shall be paid; and (d) a notary public, as well as the Plaintiff and E, jointly and severally and severally guaranteed the above obligation of the Plaintiff and E, written an authentic deed of monetary loan agreement No. 61 of the document of 2017 prepared by the law firm (hereinafter “instant authentic deed”).
【Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy, Entry of Evidence A Nos. 1 and 4, Purport of the whole pleadings】
2. The plaintiff's assertion
A. On July 24, 2012, C, the Plaintiff’s intermediary, transferred a total of KRW 55 million from the Defendant to the Plaintiff’s account in the name of the Plaintiff, and then conveyed the money to the Defendant’s Cowals Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”).
However, the Defendant seized the construction machinery owned by the Plaintiff by taking advantage of the circumstance of remitting the said money to the account in the name of the Plaintiff when the Defendant was unable to refund the investment money from the Nonparty Company.
In order to cancel the above provisional seizure against the Plaintiff, the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s debt of KRW 50 million and demanded to pay KRW 10 million immediately.
Accordingly, on January 17, 2017, the Plaintiff prepared the instant notarial deed and paid KRW 10 million to the Defendant on the same day.
B. C is merely a receipt of investment money from the Defendant and delivery thereof to the non-party company, and does not bear any obligation against the Defendant. As such, the notarial deed of this case is made out without a cause claim and null and void. It is null and void pursuant to Article 103 or 104 of the Civil Act as it was made out by using the Plaintiff’s old address, and must be revoked as it was made by deceiving the Plaintiff.
C. Even if the notarial deed of this case is valid, C shall be the defendant.