대여금
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 45,00,000 won and the period from November 14, 2016 to December 5, 2018.
1. The facts of recognition are as follows: Gap evidence Nos. 1 (the tea certificate, the defendant C does not deny that there was no part of the loan certificate; however, according to witness E and F's testimony, the defendant C visited the plaintiff hospital with G on January 13, 2014 and the defendant D is the person who prepared D part of the loan certificate, and the whole purport of the argument is as follows: in full view of the purport of the whole argument, the defendant C agreed to pay a total of KRW 45 million to the plaintiff within 10 months on January 13, 2014, and the defendant D agreed to pay a total of KRW 45 million to the plaintiff within 10 months, and on December 2, 2016, the defendant D agreed to pay the above debt of the defendant C within 500,000 won per month to the plaintiff within two years.
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the above KRW 45,000,000 and the damages for delay.
B. The Defendants asserted as to the Defendants’ assertion that Defendant C did not borrow money from the Plaintiff on January 13, 2014, and Defendant C did not accept the Plaintiff’s claim on the following grounds: (a) Defendant C did not borrow money from the Plaintiff; (b) Defendant A’s evidence Nos. 1 (a) arbitrarily prepared by misappropriation; and (c) Defendant D provided joint and several sureties only with the loan borrowed by Defendant C, the mother of the Defendant C; and (d) Defendant D did not comply with the Plaintiff’s claim on the grounds that the loan under
However, as long as the authenticity of a dispositive document is recognized, it shall be interpreted that the parties have expressed their intent in accordance with the contents of the language stated in the dispositive document unless there are special circumstances to deny the probative value of the dispositive document, and the testimony of the witness G alone is insufficient to deny the probative value of the above dispositive document, and there is no
Therefore, the defendants' arguments are not accepted.
C. Accordingly, the Defendants are subject to the lawsuit.