구상금
1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 52,731,814 and KRW 52,729,764 from March 31, 199 to October 15, 2004.
1. According to Gap evidence Nos. 1-1 and 2 as to the part claimed for the extension of extinctive prescription, the court below rendered a judgment against the defendant on December 2, 2004 that "(i) the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 52,731,814 won and 52,729,764 won with 18% interest per annum from March 31, 1999 to October 15, 2004, and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment. (iii) the court below shall be liable to pay the plaintiff 52,731,814 won and 52,764 won with 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment." Since the above judgment becomes final and conclusive, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 20% interest per annum 30% interest per annum from the day after the date of full payment.
2. As to the part on the claim of the 1,663,669 won by subrogation
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff spent KRW 2,395,260 as the expenses for the measures to preserve the claim for reimbursement for the collection of the above amount of reimbursement, such as “the details of the payment and recovery of payment by subrogation,” and collected KRW 731,591 among them, and sought payment of KRW 1,663,669 as the remainder of which is KRW 1,63,669.
First, this paper examines the substitute payment incurred before the date of closing argument in the previous suit.
When the Plaintiff performed the guaranteed obligation due to the Plaintiff’s failure to repay the principal and interest of loan to the financial institution at the time when the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with the Defendant on March 30, 1998, the Defendant executes the obligation to the Plaintiff (i) the amount of the obligation, (ii) damages for delay in accordance with the ratio set by the Plaintiff based on the relevant provisions, and (iii) the amount