beta
Text
1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 13, 2005, C borrowed KRW 20 million from the New Port Agricultural Cooperative. The Defendant provided credit guarantee to C’s new Port Agricultural Cooperative. From January 15, 2008, C delayed payment of interest on the above loan from January 15, 2008, and the Defendant subrogated for KRW 21,178,902 to the New Port Agricultural Cooperative in subrogation of C on March 31, 2009, and applied for a payment order against C on March 24, 2010 with the Daegu District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Office 201,193 won among the Defendant’s 23,961,193 won and its 21,09,724% interest on the above loan from February 24, 2010.
B. On November 1, 2003, C borrowed KRW 30 million from Plaintiff B, the Dong-dong branch, and on November 25, 2003, on November 25, 2003, B borrowed KRW 1/2 of the 2641m2 shares (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) in the North-gu, Dong-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seopo-si, B, the maximum debt amount of KRW 40 million, and the debtor C’s right to collateral (hereinafter “the instant previous right to collateral”) with the intent to avoid any further compulsory execution. On February 12, 2009, C concluded a false right to collateral with Plaintiff B on February 12, 2009, with respect to the instant real estate on the same day, B concluded a false right to collateral security agreement with the maximum debt amount of KRW 10 million and C as the debtor (hereinafter “the instant right to collateral security”).
C. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff B by asserting that the instant mortgage agreement between the Plaintiff B and C was a fraudulent act as the Daegu District Court Branch Branch Decision 2012Ga13840, and the said court claimed that the instant mortgage agreement was a fraudulent act. The said court concluded on July 16, 2013 between the Plaintiff and C regarding the instant real estate on February 12, 2009.