대여금
1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.
2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.
3...
1. According to the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, and 2 as to the cause of the claim and the whole pleadings, the plaintiff loaned 2,00,000 won per annum to C on March 30, 201 and 25% per annum on June 30, 2011 (hereinafter "the loan of this case"). The defendant is found to have jointly and severally guaranteed the debt of C with the maximum amount of KRW 3,00,000 (hereinafter "joint and severally guaranteed debt of this case"), and the plaintiff is deemed to have repaid 1,30,000,00 won out of the loan principal of the above loan principal of the plaintiff or the defendant, and it is evident that the loan principal of the defendants not paid up to now is calculated as KRW 700,00 (2,000,000 - 1,30,000).
Therefore, barring special circumstances, the Defendant shall jointly and severally with C pay the Plaintiff the remaining principal of KRW 700,000 and damages for delay after July 1, 201, which is the day following the due date for payment, to the Plaintiff, and is obligated to pay within the maximum amount of KRW 3,00,000, which is the maximum amount of the above guaranteed liability.
2. Determination as to the defenses for the completion of extinctive prescription of commercial claims
A. The defendant's assertion is that the plaintiff is a merchant as a credit service provider, and the plaintiff's loan claim against C constitutes a claim arising out of commercial activity, and thus, the five-year extinctive prescription under Article 64 of the Commercial Act has expired, and the defendant's joint and several liability also has expired according to the subsidiary nature
B. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively integrating the purport of the entire pleadings in the written evidence Nos. 1 and 2, namely, the Plaintiff’s use of “standard form for loan transaction” (Evidence No. 1-1) in a standardized printing format, and C, at the time of the above loan, prepared and implemented a “personal credit information inquiry agreement” in a printed format (Evidence No. 1-2), and the above written consent was provided to the Plaintiff for purposes other than the purpose of determining whether the “personal credit information” was established and maintained, such as financial transaction.