beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 10,366,348 to the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from December 14, 2012 to March 4, 2015, and the following.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On July 22, 2011, the Plaintiff purchased a truck under the Defendant’s name, and took out a loan of KRW 50 million from the Apk Savings Bank (hereinafter “instant savings bank”) in the Defendant’s name (hereinafter “instant loan”), as joint and several sureties (hereinafter “joint and several sureties”).
B. The instant loan was granted a loan from the savings bank of this case for the purpose of purchasing a truck and operating it actually, and the Plaintiff was also jointly and severally guaranteed with the knowledge of such circumstances.
C. On December 14, 2012, the Plaintiff repaid to the Savings Bank total amount of KRW 20,732,697 as joint and several sureties the principal and interest arising from the instant loan.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1-1-4 and Eul evidence 3, testimony of witness C, purport of whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. In a case where a third party has used his name in obtaining a loan from a financial institution related to the legal principles, regardless of whether he is liable as a principal debtor, in an internal relationship with the financial institution that is the creditor, he cannot, as a matter of course, be deemed a joint and several surety who has performed joint and several liability as a principal debtor unless he is the principal debtor in substance. The joint and several surety has guaranteed that the third party is the principal debtor in fact, or has guaranteed that the third party is the principal debtor in fact, and it is reasonable to bear the responsibility for the third party in trust, only in the case where the third party is responsible for the reason attributable to the third party and it seems reasonable to bear the responsibility, the third
However, even if a joint and several surety, knowing that a third party who is the nominal owner of the principal obligation is not the actual principal obligor, has guaranteed the obligation or has fulfilled the obligation for the guarantee, that third party shall be the actual principal obligor.