beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. As to KRW 48,086,624 and KRW 47,962,354 among Defendant A, Defendant A, as of April 29, 2014.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On December 23, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with Defendant A on the grounds of KRW 45 million with the guaranteed principal, and issued the same credit guarantee agreement (hereinafter “the instant credit guarantee”). Defendant A obtained the said credit guarantee agreement from the Industrial Bank of Korea as a security, with a national housing charter loan of KRW 50 million (hereinafter “instant loan”).
B. According to the instant credit guarantee agreement, a person who received a credit guarantee shall pay the amount, damages, and incidental expenses at the time the Plaintiff performed the guaranteed obligation, and the Plaintiff may collect an additional guarantee fee for the amount not paid out of the guaranteed obligation guaranteed by the person who received the credit guarantee, in a case where the liability for the performance of the guaranteed obligation is not rescinded because the person who received the credit guarantee has failed to perform
The rate of damages determined by the Plaintiff is 12% per annum from December 1, 2012 to August 31, 2015, and 8% per annum from the next day to that of the date.
C. After that, Defendant A lost the benefit accrued from the instant loan. Upon the request of the Industrial Bank of Korea, the Plaintiff subrogated for KRW 47,962,354 of the remaining interest and interest on the instant loan to the said bank on April 29, 2014, and the additional guarantee fee is KRW 124,270.
On the other hand, Defendant D et al. concluded a false lease contract and conspiredd to obtain money by deceiving a bank by deceiving a document as if the lessee works for the company, Defendant D et al., Defendant D et al., Defendant E et al., Defendant C et al., Defendant C’s role as a general manager of loan work according to his instructions, Defendant C et al., Defendant A’s role as a false lessee, and Defendant B played a false lessor’s role.
Defendant D, etc., around December 201, with the consent of Defendant B, the lessor, who was the applicant for the loan, was falsely prepared as if the applicant was F’s employee, and related documents, such as the income tax withholding receipt, payment statement, etc., and the false lessor.