보증채무금
1. As to KRW 459,123,723 and KRW 391,343,757 among the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall annually pay to the Plaintiff KRW 459,123,723 from May 19, 2015 to August 20, 2015.
1. Indication of claim;
A. The Plaintiff traded the following loans with the so-called Non-party corporation Han Pafa (hereinafter “Non-party corporation”) and the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan obligations.
① On September 17, 2010, KRW 4.36% per annum and KRW 12% per annum for delay damages, and the Defendant provided a comprehensive collateral guarantee of KRW 2.40 million per annum.
② On July 27, 2011, the interest rate of KRW 66 million was 3.92% per annum and damages for delay was 12% per annum, and the Defendant provided a comprehensive collateral guarantee of KRW 80,000 per annum.
③ On September 29, 2011, KRW 4.47% per annum and KRW 12% per annum for delay damages, the Defendant provided a comprehensive collateral guarantee of KRW 156 million per annum.
④ On June 27, 2013, KRW 4.61% per annum and interest rate of KRW 150 million per annum and damages for delay were set at 12% per annum and the Defendant provided a comprehensive collateral guarantee of KRW 1.80 million per annum.
⑤ On September 30, 2013, KRW 50,00 was leased at 4.59% per annum and 12% per annum, and the Defendant provided comprehensive collateral guarantee for guarantee limit of KRW 60,000 per annum.
B. On February 27, 2014, Nonparty Company lost the benefit of time due to the above loan obligations, and the above loan agreements were terminated.
C. The amount to be paid by the Defendant as of May 19, 2015 is KRW 391,343,757, in total, KRW 385,252,018, interest KRW 4,725,389, and substitute payment KRW 1,36,350.
2. Judgment by public notice of applicable provisions of Acts (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);
3. Since the provision on statutory interest rate under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings to be dismissed was amended into 15% per annum from October 1, 2015, the Plaintiff’s claim seeking an excess is dismissed.