채무부존재확인
1. There is no obligation or obligation between the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) with respect to a promissory note stated in the attached Form.
1. As to the plaintiff's main claim
A. The Plaintiff’s summary of the assertion was, at the time of the 10-year grace period, the representative director of the Plaintiff Company C (hereinafter “Non-Party Co., Ltd.”), and at the time of the 10-year grace period, the Plaintiff endorsed and delivered a promissory note as indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant promissory note”) to the Defendant, who was the representative of the Plaintiff, in the capacity of the Non-Party Co., Ltd., the Defendant, in the capacity of representative of the Non-Party Co., Ltd., the company issuing the
On the other hand, the amount discounted by the non-party company at the time was agreed to be treated on an equal basis with the cost of repairing the factory owned by the defendant, which was not transferred by the non-party company to the transfer to the refusal of the delivery of the tenant, and all parts related to the Promissory Notes
However, on January 16, 2018, the Defendant sent the word “A” to repay the Promissory Notes, and the Plaintiff entered the instant lawsuit with the Defendant to verify that there is no obligation or obligation related to the Promissory Notes.
B. According to each of the statements in the evidence No. 1, No. 1, and No. 1, it is recognized that the endorser of the Promissory Notes in this case was a non-party company and the Plaintiff was endorsed in the position of representative director of the non-party company, and the Plaintiff was not in the position of an obligor under the said Promissory Notes, and that the Defendant sent a text message, “I will resolve before the Defendant’s cell phone with the Plaintiff’s cell phone that “I will not pay the face value of the Promissory Notes 27.5 million and the face value of the Promissory Notes 27.5 million and if I will pay the legal interest for
According to the above facts of recognition, there are no claims and obligations against the Promissory Notes in this case between the plaintiff and the defendant, and it is judged that the defendant is dissatisfied with them and therefore there is a benefit to seek confirmation.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim on the merits is justified.
2. The defendant.