beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendants are jointly and severally liable for 43,749,082 won and the aforementioned amount from April 15, 2014 to May 22, 2019.
Reasons
1. The facts of recognition are as shown in the annexed sheet of claim;
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 7, purport of the whole pleadings]
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 43,749,082 as well as damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from April 15, 2014 to May 22, 2019, which is the last delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case, and 12% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment. Defendant B is liable to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 3,410,00 won and 6% per annum from May 8, 2014 to May 22, 2019, which is the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case, and 12% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.
B. As to Defendant C’s assertion, Defendant C commenced individual rehabilitation procedures with Suwon District Court Decision 2016Da101809 against himself/herself and authorized the repayment plan on November 7, 2017, and the instant claim for indemnity was not included in the rehabilitation procedure because the Plaintiff was unaware of himself/herself and did not file any additional report, and thus, the instant claim for indemnity amount is unreasonable. However, the claim for indemnity amount in this case is asserted to the effect that it is unfair, but the part excluding the repayment according to the repayment plan among individual rehabilitation claims stated in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors is all exempted. However, the claim not entered in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors cannot be subject to repayment according to the repayment plan and thus does not affect the effect of immunity exemption (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Da32014, Jan. 12, 2017). Accordingly, the foregoing circumstance alone alone cannot prevent the Plaintiff from filing the instant lawsuit.
3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is justified and accepted.