대여금
1. The Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the Appointed C is dismissed in entirety.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff.
1. According to the evidence evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as to the cause of the claim, it may be acknowledged that the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the appointed party C borrowed KRW 35.4 million to the Plaintiff on August 29, 2008, and that a promissory note with face value is drawn up and issued in a notarized manner.
Therefore, barring any special circumstance, Defendant (Appointed Party) and Appointed C are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 35.4 million and delay damages therefor.
2. As to the defense, the defendant (appointed party) has raised a defense to the effect that the plaintiff exempted the defendant (appointed party) from his/her obligations after drawing up the above loan certificates and promissory note notarial deeds.
Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement Nos. 3 and 4, the Plaintiff may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff prepared and delivered a written statement to the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the appointed party C on March 18, 2013 to the effect that the previous loan certificate and the promissory note Nos. 3 and 4 are invalid.
Therefore, by the plaintiff's declaration of exemption as above, the defendant (appointed party) and the appointed party C extinguished their obligations, and the defendant's defense is accepted.
The plaintiff asserts that the above declaration of exemption is based on the condition that the defendant (appointed party) should complete the registration of ownership transfer with respect to D forest land in Taean-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, and that the above condition is not fulfilled, and thus, the effect of exemption does not occur.
However, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff’s declaration of exemption was accompanied by the conditions as alleged by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is not accepted.
3. Conclusion, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the Appointed C is all dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.