(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2019.04.11 2018가단4782

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2019.04.11 2018가단4782

보증채무금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the Plaintiff

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff had a claim for construction cost equivalent to KRW 75,900,000 against Nonparty C.

B. C did not repay the above debt, and the Plaintiff received a written confirmation from C on May 12, 2017, stating that “The Plaintiff will repay the above debt from C to May 18, 2017, and if not paid by this date, the Plaintiff will substitute the loan sale contract in the process of the Yangyang-gunD and exchange it after the completion of payment.”

C. In addition, with respect to the building E (hereinafter “the instant building”) under construction by the Defendant on both Pyeongtaek-gun D and two parcels, the Plaintiff stated that “the seller, the purchaser, the Plaintiff, and the purchaser of the instant building at KRW 150,000,000, the first intermediate payment of KRW 75,900,000 shall be treated as the payment of the said first intermediate payment, and the seller may exchange the said amount with each other at the time of payment of the said amount (the time of completion of cash settlement).”

(A) has been issued. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff had a claim for the construction cost against C, and the Defendant guaranteed the above C’s obligation when the Defendant is liable for the failure to repay C. Based on this, the sales contract of this case was issued.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 75,900,000 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day following the delivery date of the original copy of the payment order of this case to the day of complete payment.

B. We examine the judgment, and there is no evidence to prove that the defendant guaranteed the defendant's obligation on behalf of the plaintiff C, as alleged by the plaintiff.

Rather, it is recognized that the above facts are added to the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, the Defendant’s delivery of the instant sales contract to the Plaintiff.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2017.06.30 2017나1414

-울산지방법원 2020.08.13 2019가합16631

-서울중앙지방법원 2021.04.09 2019가합547639

-인천지방법원부천지원 2017.07.13 2017가단5121

-의정부지방법원 2015.10.28 2015노1081