대여금
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 6-1, 2, and 7 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff set the repayment period of KRW 5 million at the rate of KRW 5 million on January 30, 2001 and at the rate of 5% on January 22, 2001 (hereinafter "the instant loan"), and the defendant, on the same day, may recognize the fact that on the same day, the plaintiff guaranteed the plaintiff's debt for the loan and stated the name D in the loan certificate as D.
According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the guaranteed debt amounting to five million won and interest or delay damages.
The defendant's argument regarding the defendant's defense against C and the defendant's loan claim of this case against C and the defendant was completed five years from January 30, 201, which is the due date for payment.
Judgment
Claims arising from not only a claim arising from an act that has been engaged in a commercial activity but also a claim arising from an act that constitutes a commercial activity for only one of the parties constitutes commercial claims subject to the period of five years under Article 64 of the Commercial Act. Such a commercial activity includes not only the basic commercial activity falling under any of the subparagraphs of Article 64 of the Commercial Act but also ancillary commercial activity performed by merchants for business.
(2) Article 47(1) of the Commercial Act provides that "the act of a merchant on behalf of his/her business shall be deemed a commercial activity" and Article 47(2) of the same Act provides that "the act of the merchant on behalf of his/her business shall be presumed to be an act of the merchant on behalf of his/her business." Thus, the act of the merchant on behalf of his/her business is presumed to be an act of the merchant on behalf of his/her business, and in order to reverse such presumption, the act of the merchant on behalf of his/her business is presumed to be an act of the commercial activity and the act of the
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da54378, Dec. 11, 2008). As to the instant case in light of the foregoing legal doctrine.