logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.04.27 2014가단16161
청구이의
Text

1. The defendant's notary public against the plaintiff is based on the notarial deed No. 2495, No. 2005, 2005.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C supplied meat from the Defendant to the “F” restaurant in Gangnam-gu Seoul, which is operated by D.

B. On May 16, 2005, the Plaintiff, C, and the Defendant drafted a notarial deed under the Monetary Loan Agreement (No. 2495) with respect to the amount of KRW 62,90,000,00 for the unpaid goods to the Defendant of C.

The plaintiff signed and sealed the Notarial Deed as a joint guarantor by his agent C.

(hereinafter) The above notarial deed is referred to as “instant notarial deed,” and C’s obligation under the notarial deed is referred to as “the principal obligation of this case,” and the Plaintiff’s obligation is referred to as “the instant guaranteed obligation”).

The main contents of the notarial deed of this case are as follows.

The creditor of Article 1 (Purpose) (the defendant is the defendant) lent 62,90,000 won to the debtor (C) on May 16, 2005, and the debtor borrowed this.

Article 2 (Period and Method of Performance) The repayment of KRW 5,00,000,00 from June 1, 2005 to the date of full payment, respectively.

Article 8 (Joint Guarantee) The guarantor (Plaintiff) guaranteed the debtor's obligation under this Agreement and agreed to jointly and severally with the debtor to perform the obligation.

Article 9 (Recognition and Recognition of Compulsory Execution) When an obligor and a joint guarantor fail to perform a pecuniary obligation under this contract, they recognize and recognize that there is no objection even if a compulsory execution has been conducted immediately.

Around January 2009, C and the Defendant made an oral agreement to the effect that “the Defendant directly supplies meat to D without going through C” at a F cafeteria operated by D.

E. C died on July 29, 2009.

F. On March 25, 2014, the Defendant applied for a seizure and collection order regarding the Plaintiff’s deposit claims against the Plaintiff’s Nonghyup Bank Co., Ltd. and Gwangju Bank based on the instant authentic deed.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The summary of the parties' arguments.

arrow