logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.08.13 2020가합200058
대여금
Text

The Plaintiff

A. Defendant A Co., Ltd.: (a) for KRW 363,251,910 and KRW 269,783,283 among them, from December 30, 2019 to December 30, 202.

Reasons

1. The grounds for the claim shall be stated in the annexed sheet of the claim;

2. Judgment by public notice of applicable provisions of Acts (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);

3. In full view of each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including the branch number) and the purport of the whole pleadings in the judgment part against defendant B, as stated in the grounds for the claim as corrected in the attached sheet, the deceased C provided each collateral guarantee to the defendant A Co., Ltd. on June 29, 201, as stated in the grounds for the claim, with respect to the business start-up support loan for the start-up of a company on April 13, 2015, the deceased C’s wife D, and E given up inheritance, and the defendant B gave up the qualified acceptance. As such, the defendant B is liable to pay each principal and interest of the loan and delay damages calculated as stated in the grounds for the claim as corrected in the attached sheet within the scope of the property inherited from the deceased C.

However, on June 29, 201, the network C provided a collateral guarantee within the limit of KRW 588 million for a loan for supporting a business start-up enterprise. Since the balance of the principal and interest of the loan falls short of the limit of the collateral guarantee, the net C shall accept the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant B only within the limit of the limit of the collateral guarantee, and the remainder of the claim shall be dismissed for lack of good cause.

(On the other hand, on April 13, 2015, the net C provided a collateral guarantee within the limit of KRW 120 million to KRW 100,000,000,000. However, this principal and interest of the loan exceeds KRW 120,000,000,000,000, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for this limit and damages for delay was accepted due to reasons).

arrow