beta
Text
1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.
2. The defendant's 13,821,478 won and 4,380,000 won among the plaintiff's 13,821,478 won on April 1, 2006.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The indication of the claim (1) B obtained a loan of KRW 20 million from the Japanese bank on August 5, 1995, and the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan claims.
(2) On June 5, 2006, the Korea Asset Management Corporation received the above loan claims from the Japanese bank, and filed a lawsuit against B and the Defendant seeking the payment of the acquisition amount, and issued a performance recommendation decision on June 5, 2006 that “the Defendant jointly and severally pays to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 13,821,478 and the amount of KRW 4,380,000, calculated at the rate of 18% per annum from April 1, 2006 to the date of full payment.” The above decision was finalized around that time.
(3) On August 28, 2012, the Plaintiff acquired the above loan claims from the Korea Asset Management Corporation, and was delegated by the Korea Asset Management Corporation with the authority to notify the transfer of claims, and notified the Defendant of the transfer of claims.
B. The judgment of the court below is that the defendant led to the confession of the plaintiff's assertion in accordance with Article 150 (1) and (3) of the Civil Procedure Act, since the defendant did not appear on the date of pleading even though he was lawfully delivered the notice of the date of pleading at the trial, and did not submit any briefs until the conclusion of pleadings at the trial.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated by the rate of 18% per annum from April 1, 2006 to the date of full payment, as to the principal and interest of this case 13,821,478 won and the principal of the loan 4,380,000 won.
2. If so, the plaintiff's claim is accepted for the reasons, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair for the conclusion, and it is so revoked, and it is so decided as per Disposition by ordering the defendant to pay it.