대여금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. If the purport of the entire pleadings is added to the statement in the evidence No. 1 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim No. 1, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 15,000,000 to the co-defendant C (hereinafter “C”) of the first instance trial on October 20, 2012 without setting interest, as the maturity date for payment on March 30, 2014. In this case, the Defendant can recognize the fact that the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the loan obligation.
Therefore, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable with C to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 15,00,000 and the damages for delay calculated by applying the rate of 20% per annum from November 8, 2014 to the date of full payment after the final delivery of the original copy of the instant payment order sought by the Plaintiff.
2. Defendant’s assertion and judgment
A. The Defendant asserts that C only provided a certificate of loan (No. 1) as collateral in preparation for the Plaintiff’s failure to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 15,00,000,000, and that C thereafter provided the Plaintiff with the monthly time limit, and that C should deduct the amount of the time limit paid by C from the amount of the time limit.
B. However, in preparation for a case where C does not provide the Plaintiff with a maturity of KRW 15,00,000,000, there is no evidence to acknowledge that C provided a certificate of loan (Evidence A) as a collateral. In addition, if the authenticity is recognized, the existence of a legal act should be recognized unless there are special circumstances to deny the existence and content of the expression of intent indicated in the document (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da38602, Oct. 13, 200), and there is no special circumstance to deny the contents of the certificate of loan (Evidence A), which is a disposal document to which the authenticity is recognized. Thus, the above assertion by the Defendant is without merit.
3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendant is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance is delivered with this conclusion.