대여금
1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;
2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.
3...
1. Determination as to the cause of claim Gap evidence Nos. 1-1 through 5 (a loan certificate, and the defendant's seal imprint part is presumed to be the authenticity of the whole document due to the lack of dispute over the part of the defendant's seal impressions. The defendant defense to the effect that Eul, who is the husband, has forged the above loan certificate, but there is no evidence to believe Eul No. 1 and otherwise recognize it), and considering the whole purport of pleading in the statement No. 3 as to the whole, Eul, which had been engaged in the construction business at the time, borrowed 10 million won in total from the plaintiff on several occasions from July 5, 2002 to August 26, 2002, and the defendant has jointly and severally guaranteed it, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay the loan No. 100 million won and delay damages to the plaintiff.
2. As to the defendant's defense, since the plaintiff's claim for the return of loans against B constitutes commercial claim and the five-year extinctive prescription has expired, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is also asserted that the period of extinctive prescription has expired. Thus, not only a claim arising from both parties' commercial activity but also a claim arising from an act that constitutes a commercial activity against one of the parties constitutes a commercial claim to which the five-year extinctive prescription period under Article 64 of the Commercial Act applies. Such commercial activity includes not only the basic commercial activity falling under each subparagraph of Article 46 of the Commercial Act but also ancillary commercial activity that the merchant conducts for business (see Supreme Court Decision 93Da54842, Apr. 29, 1994). The merchant's act is presumed to be an act for business (see Article 47 (2) of the Commercial Act). The five-year extinctive prescription period is presumed to be a commercial claim for the return of loans against B, and the principal obligation of this case has lapsed since April 30, 2004.