사해행위취소
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 82,948,443 and KRW 82,657,857 among the Defendants. From December 6, 2016 to March 6, 2017.
1. Basic facts
A. On April 16, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”) and the Defendant Co., Ltd. on the guarantee number C with the amount of KRW 100,000,000 of the small and medium enterprise loans that the Defendant Co., Ltd will receive from the national bank, as the guaranteed amount of KRW 90,000,000, and the guarantee term of April 15, 2014 (the change to April 14, 2017 thereafter).
Defendant B jointly and severally guaranteed the indemnity liability to be borne by the Defendant Company against the Plaintiff according to the above credit guarantee agreement.
B. On June 18, 2016, Defendant Company lost the benefit of time due to loans owed to a national bank due to overdue interest.
Accordingly, on December 6, 2016, the Plaintiff subrogated 82,657,857 won to the National Bank.
At present, the Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity against the Defendants is as follows, and the interest rate for delay after February 1, 2016 under the Credit Guarantee Agreement is 10% per annum.
C [Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, each entry in Gap evidence 1-9 (including virtual numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Accordingly, the Defendants are jointly and severally obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 82,948,443 and KRW 82,657,857, among them, 10% per annum from December 6, 2016 to March 17, 2017, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks.
Defendant B asserts that the present representative D of the Defendant Company had had the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation of the Plaintiff by deceiving him to settle his obligation against the Plaintiff.
However, even if Defendant B’s assertion is true, there is no assertion or proof as to the fact that the Plaintiff knew or could have known the deception, and the above assertion cannot be accepted without further review.
3. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is accepted on the grounds of all reasons.