(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.20 2017나46105

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.20 2017나46105

보증채무금

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3.Paragraph 1 of the text of the judgment of the court of first instance.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. On July 9, 2014, the Plaintiff leased KRW 27,100,00 to B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) for a loan period of 60 months, interest rate of loan 7.5% per annum, and interest rate of 24% per annum (hereinafter “instant loan”). At the time, the Defendant, the representative director of the instant company, offered joint and several guarantee for the instant loan obligations. After that, the instant company was unable to repay the principal and interest of the instant loan under the instant loan agreement, it lost its benefit as of January 26, 2017. The loan obligations under the instant loan agreement are as of January 26, 2017, including the principal amount of KRW 15,252,121, interest and delay damages amount of KRW 15,350,614 (15,252,121,2198,493) and the purport of the entire parties’ pleadings can be acknowledged or determined by comprehensively taking into account the following facts:

B. According to the above facts, the Defendant, a joint guarantor, is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 15,350,614 of the principal and interest of KRW 15,252,121 of the principal, as well as damages for delay at the rate of 24% per annum from January 27, 2017 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the base date for calculating the overdue interest.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant asserts that the claim of this case should be dismissed because the successor representative director of the company of this case at the time of the defendant's withdrawal from the company of this case is responsible for all the defendant's obligations. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the defendant's assertion, and even if there is an agreement between the successor representative director of the company of this case and the defendant as alleged in the defendant, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff consented or consented to it, and therefore, the defendant's assertion is invalid. Thus, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. The defendant also filed against the company of this case which is the principal debtor.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2017.01.13 2016나56318

-대전지방법원 2017.05.17 2016가단226612

-부산지방법원 2020.02.18 2019가단15058

-의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.02.02 2016가단89833