beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.12 2016나14040

양수금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. All claims filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the designated parties.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C received loans from an agricultural cooperative on December 12, 1998 at interest rate of KRW 16.5% per annum, interest rate of KRW 7,500,000 per annum, interest rate of KRW 23% per annum, and loan period of December 12, 200. H jointly guaranteed the above loan obligation to the above cooperative.

B. Since then, C lost the benefit of time by delaying the repayment of the above loan obligation. On June 28, 2013, C transferred the above loan obligation to C and H to the Plaintiff, and notified the transfer of claim on June 23, 2014.

C. As H died on March 17, 2007, the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the appointed parties, the co-inheritors of the deceased, reported the renunciation of inheritance on the deceased’s property under the Jeonju District Court 2007-Ma340, and received a judgment on June 8, 2007, which accepted the renunciation of inheritance from the above court.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment asserted that the plaintiff acquired the above union's loan claims against the above union H from the agricultural cooperative, and sought payment of the above loan against the defendant (appointed party) and the designated parties, who are co-inheritors of the deceased. However, as seen earlier, the defendant (appointed party) and the designated parties received the report of renunciation of inheritance as to the deceased's property, and thus, they are no longer in the status of the deceased's heir's property.

Therefore, on the contrary premise, the prior plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. According to the conclusion, all claims filed by the plaintiff against the defendant (appointed party) and the appointed party are dismissed. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair in conclusion, the appeal by the defendant (appointed party) is accepted, and the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and all claims filed by the plaintiff against the defendant (appointed party) and the appointed party are dismissed, and Article 99 of the Civil Procedure Act is applied to the bearing of litigation costs.