대여금
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
Judgment of the first instance.
1. The plaintiff's assertion
A. On December 24, 2011, the Defendant, who was in a de facto marital relationship with B, found the Plaintiff along with B and asked the Plaintiff to lend its operating funds of E E, E, which is operated by Dong, a partner of B, with B, and the Plaintiff believed that the Defendant would repay the loan with B along with B, and lent 40 million won (hereinafter “instant loan”) to the account in the name of D designated by B as of the end of December 24, 201.
However, since the instant loan was not repaid after the maturity date, the Plaintiff urged B to repay the loan, and B, on April 3, 2012, prepared a written confirmation that the Plaintiff would repay the instant loan by April 13, 2012 (hereinafter “instant confirmation”). The Defendant affixed the Defendant’s seal impression on the instant confirmation document and issued a copy of the Defendant’s certificate of personal seal impression, resident registration certificate, etc. in the name of the Defendant.
In addition, on September 25, 2012, the Plaintiff prepared and received the certificate of borrowing (No. 9; hereinafter “the certificate of borrowing of this case”) under the name of the Defendant from B on behalf of the Defendant.
Therefore, as a joint or joint guarantor of the loan of this case, the defendant is jointly and severally liable with B to pay the loan of this case 40 million won and damages for delay to the plaintiff.
B. Even if the Defendant did not have the intent to jointly rent the instant loan or as joint and several sureties, the Plaintiff believed that the Defendant had the intent to repay the instant loan together with B, and subsequently lent the instant loan on behalf of the Defendant, in light of the following: (a) at the time of the instant loan, the Plaintiff and the Defendant borrowed money from the Plaintiff and repaid the money in the past; (b) the Defendant and B were in de facto marital relationship; and (c) the Defendant operated the business related to B and real estate together with the Defendant, and (b) thereafter.