beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.22 2017가합564685

손해배상(기)

Text

1. Of the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiffs’ obligation to return unjust enrichment against the Defendant on behalf of D Co., Ltd.

Reasons

1. Details of the instant case

A. (1) The Plaintiff is a stock company with the objective of public restaurant business, etc., and operates F stores on the first floor of E B, the first floor of E, and the Plaintiff is a stock company with the purpose of public restaurant business, etc., and the Plaintiff B operates F stores at E, E, a stock company with the objective of public restaurant business, etc.) G is a person who was the representative director of Plaintiff A, who was the Plaintiff’s representative director, during the period from November 7, 2012 to May 26, 2017. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 26374, Sep. 7, 2015; Presidential Decree No. 27775, May 26, 2017>

B. On October 26, 2016, Plaintiff B’s commission of the No. 1 to prepare a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement for consumption (hereinafter “instant loan”). G borrowed KRW 100 million from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant loan 1”).

At the time, Plaintiff B jointly and severally guaranteed the debt of KRW 100 million of G. (2) With respect to the debt of the instant loan to the Defendant of G, G, as to the debt of the instant loan, on November 29, 2016, as the status of the debtor and the representative director of Plaintiff B, a joint and several surety, in the position of the Defendant and notary public, at the law firm I, “the Defendant has leased KRW 100 million to G on October 26, 2016, at the rate of 24% per annum, and the due date for repayment, as until December 31, 2017, respectively. The joint and several surety agreed to guarantee the debt of G under this contract and to jointly and severally repay the debt with G. In the event that G and joint surety fail to perform the debt under this contract, G entrusted the preparation of a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement with the effect that there is no objection even if compulsory execution was conducted, and on the same day, the notary public prepared the notarial deed of this case as the No. 1324 (hereinafter referred to “No”).

C. On February 2, 2017, Plaintiff A’s commission of the No. 1 to prepare a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement for consumption (hereinafter “No. 2”). G borrowed KRW 100 million from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant loan”).

At the time, the plaintiff A guaranteed the above 100 million won loan debt of G. 2) the defendant of G. 2.