logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.09.28 2016가단21598
보증채무금
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 80,000,000 as well as annual 5% from March 1, 2016 to October 13, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 11, 2015, C borrowed KRW 80 million from the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the instant loan”). As of November 30, 2015, C had due date designated and borrowed the loan.

B. On September 14, 2015, C prepared a letter to the Plaintiff stating that “In lieu of extending the due date for the instant loan to February 28, 2016, one room shall be provided as security for the building located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu.” However, the Defendant guaranteed C’s obligation for the instant loan through the letter.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at each rate of KRW 80 million per annum from March 1, 2016 to October 13, 2016, the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 5% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment, under the Civil Act, to the day of full payment, unless there are special circumstances as a guarantor of the loan of this case.

B. As to the defendant's defense of the highest search, the defendant has the defense of the highest search pursuant to Article 437 of the Civil Code to the effect that the plaintiff can claim against the defendant in supplement after the first execution to C, who is the principal debtor. However, the right of the guarantor's defense of the highest search may be exercised in cases where the guarantor has the ability to repay to the principal debtor and where he proves the fact that the execution is easy, and there is no evidence to prove that the debtor has the ability to repay and the execution is easy, and the defendant's defense of simultaneous performance is not reasonable. 2) After the simultaneous performance defense, the defendant takes over the registration of transfer of ownership as to E commercial building 104 (hereinafter referred to as the "store of this case") from the plaintiff at the time of borrowing the loan of this case.

arrow