beta
Text
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 26,112,00 and 5% per annum from December 26, 2012 to June 7, 2018.
Reasons
1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff lent KRW 59.13 million to Defendant B and received only part of the loan. The Defendants prepared a monetary loan certificate with the obligation to pay KRW 40 million remaining loans to the Plaintiff on November 9, 2009, and agreed to repay the loan by December 25, 2012. As such, the Defendants jointly and severally agreed to jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff the loan amounting to KRW 40 million after deducting KRW 7,407,688 from the cancellation refund of the stock-based pension insurance contract, which Defendant B purchased by stealing the Plaintiff’s name, the remainder of the loan amounting to KRW 32,529,312, and delay damages therefrom.
2. Determination
A. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as to the facts of the monetary payment agreement and the whole pleadings, it is recognized that the plaintiff loaned a total of KRW 5,9130,000 to defendant B from March 16, 2007 to May 19, 2008 (the defendant asserted that 3,9130,000 won out of the above money was lent to the plaintiff rather than the plaintiff, but it is reasonable to deem that the plaintiff lent the above money in light of the fact that all of the above money was deposited out of the plaintiff's account, etc.). The defendants promised the plaintiff on November 9, 2009 that "the principal amount of KRW 40,000,000 shall be paid in installments on the 25th of each month, and confirmed that it should be repaid from January 20, 2010."
In full view of the aforementioned facts and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Defendants agreed to jointly and severally pay KRW 40 million from January 25, 2010 to December 25, 2012 for the repayment of remaining loans to the Plaintiff via the said monetary loan certificate.
The Defendants asserted to the effect that the above monetary loan certificate has no validity since the body was prepared in order to make the Plaintiff aware of its mother's identity at the Plaintiff's request. The Defendants asserted to the effect that the above monetary loan certificate has no validity.
(b).