대여금
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except for the addition of "the judgment on the plaintiff's second defense" as to the grounds that the plaintiff newly claims in this court, and therefore, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.
2. Judgment on the plaintiff's second defense
A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion and key issue are as follows: (a) the Defendant, as the principal debtor, renounced the statute of limitations interest on the instant loan obligation as the principal debtor, and at the same time, expressed his intent to perform the joint and several liability regardless of the completion of the statute of limitations on the instant loan obligation as the joint and several surety; (b) thus, the Plaintiff still
However, even if the principal obligor renounces the benefit of prescription, there is no effect on the surety (Article 433(2) of the Civil Act), and it is not necessary to consider whether the principal obligor has the authority to act on behalf of the Defendant, and without examining whether the principal obligor has the authority to act on behalf of the Defendant, the argument that
Therefore, the key issue of this part is whether the defendant expressed his intent to perform the joint and several liability, regardless of the completion of the statute of limitations for the loans of this case as a joint and several surety.
(2) If an obligor has approved an obligation after the expiration of the extinctive prescription, it may be presumed that the obligor has renounced the obligation with the knowledge of the completion of the prescription (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da100098, Mar. 11, 2010). However, even if the surety performed or approved the obligation upon the expiration of the extinctive prescription on the principal obligation, the waiver of the benefit of the extinctive prescription on the principal obligation by the act of the surety, other than the principal obligor, cannot be said to have been effective, and the principal obligation shall not be deemed to have been discharged despite the expiration of the extinctive prescription on