beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The defendant bears the total costs of the lawsuit after the filing of the appeal.
purport, purport, and.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Gyeongnam Enterprise Co., Ltd. is the apartment of this case, "Seong-gu B and C ground D apartment (hereinafter referred to as "the apartment of this case").
(1) On October 11, 2004, the Seoul Central District Court (2015 Gohap10070) rendered a decision to commence rehabilitation proceedings on April 7, 2015, and the Plaintiff was appointed as a manager and taken over the instant lawsuit.
"Plaintiffs" in total before and after the receipt of the lawsuit.
B. On December 18, 2003, the defendant is the execution company of the apartment of this case, which is the execution company of the apartment of this case (hereinafter referred to as the "Guol Construction Project").
(3) Of the instant apartment units, 704 of the sales price of KRW 355,379,00 (the contract amount shall be paid in 35,538,000 each on the date of the contract and on December 19, 2003, and the intermediate payment shall be paid in 35,538,000 each on six occasions from February 18, 2004 to October 18, 2005, and the remainder 71,076,000 shall be paid in the time of occupancy.
is the buyer of the purchase in lots.
hereinafter referred to as 'instant sales contract'.
C. The Defendant, around 2003, borrowed an intermediate payment of KRW 213,227,00 from a national bank for the payment of intermediate payments pursuant to the instant sales contract; hereinafter “the intermediate payment loan in this case”).
At that time, the plaintiff as a contractor of the apartment of this case, guaranteed the defendant's intermediate payment loan of this case.
At the time of the intermediate payment loan of this case, the plaintiff and fran construction, and the defendant agreed that the above apartment complex is completed between the national bank and the national bank, and that the defendant will provide the above loans as security upon the acquisition of ownership. In addition, at the time of the intermediate payment loan of this case, the franchise construction and the plaintiff agreed that the above apartment complex is provided as security for the above loans.
The contract concluded that the number of apartment buyers of this case had to obtain a loan of the prescribed amount out of the sale price, and the main contents of the loan agreement of this case are as follows.