beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.06.19 2015가단7910

청구이의

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The following facts do not conflict between the Parties:

On March 23, 2012, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 10 million from the Defendant of the Credit Business Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant loan”). The Plaintiff issued a promissory note with the Defendant as the addressee at the face value of KRW 10 million, the place of issue, the place of payment, Seoul, the place of payment, and the date of payment. As to the said promissory note, where a notary public fails to pay the money of the Promissory Notes No. 33780 of the Han River 2012, “In the event a notary public does not pay the money of the Promissory Notes No. 33780 of the Han River 2012, the Plaintiff is deemed as the “notarial deed of the Promissory Notes.”

was drawn up.

B. From April 16, 2012 to December 4, 2012, the Plaintiff paid KRW 12,506,594 to the Defendant nine times, thereby repaying all principal and interest of the instant loan 1.

C. On July 11, 2014, the Plaintiff again borrowed KRW 20 million from the Defendant.

hereinafter referred to as “instant second loan”. D.

As the Plaintiff delayed the repayment of the loan No. 2, the Plaintiff applied for a decision of acceptance on November 25, 2014 with the Seoul Southern District Court 2014TTTTTTTT 2014TTT 23020 on the basis of the notarial deed of promissory note No. 10,025,30 won, the Plaintiff and the third obligor Co., Ltd. for the attachment and assignment order of the claim. The above attachment and assignment order of the claim became final and conclusive on December 24, 2014.

2. Determination:

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: ① there was no separate promissory note No. 2 at the time of receiving the instant loan, and since the instant loan No. 1 was fully repaid, the validity of the instant promissory note No. 2 was lost; ② No. notarial effect was to be visited by the creditor and the debtor. The Plaintiff did not have visited the Han River as a law firm that prepared the instant promissory note No. 2 at the time of receiving the instant loan No. 2; ③ No. notarial deed with a promis