beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.14 2016가단5148077

구상금 등 청구의 소

Text

1. Defendant A’s KRW 68,206,742 and annual 8% from May 19, 2016 to August 17, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Common factual relations;

A. On May 22, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a housing finance credit guarantee agreement with Defendant A on May 23, 201, setting the term of guarantee as KRW 69,30,000,000 of the guaranteed principal, and issued a written credit guarantee agreement. On the same day, Defendant A borrowed the said guarantee amount of KRW 77,00,000 from our bank as security.

B. However, Defendant A failed to repay the above loans, and on May 18, 2016, the Plaintiff subrogated to the Bank for KRW 68,206,742 as the principal and interest of the loans, etc.

C. Meanwhile, in the above credit guarantee agreement, when the Plaintiff performed the above guaranteed obligation, Defendant A agreed to pay the amount and damages in proportion to the amount determined by the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the percentage of damages determined by the Plaintiff is 8% per annum from September 1, 2015.

[Judgment of the court below] The ground for recognition is without merit (applicable only between the plaintiff and the defendant B), Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Gap evidence No. 7-1, 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of the determination as to the claim against the defendant A, the defendant A is obligated to pay the plaintiff the amount of 68,206,742 won subrogated for the performance of the obligation under the above credit guarantee agreement and 8% per annum as stipulated in the above agreement from May 19, 2016 to August 17, 2016, with a copy of the complaint served on the plaintiff from May 19, 2016, and 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of full payment.

3. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff: (a) Defendant A et al. conspireds with Defendant B, the husband of the Defendant B, and instead, did not have concluded a normal lease agreement on the housing owned by the Defendant; (b) obtained a loan from the Korean bank; and (c) Defendant A et al., in the process, prepared a written confirmation of the lease agreement with the bank; and (d) withdrawn the loan with the account in its name