beta
Text
1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiffs are the heirs, and Plaintiff A’s spouse, Plaintiff B, C, and D of the deceased I are the children of the deceased I.
B. The Defendants are the deceased H’s successors, Defendant E’s spouse, Defendant F, and Defendant G are the deceased H’s children.
C. The network I lent 70 million won to Defendant E from July 2001 to June 2003 (hereinafter “instant loan”). Defendant E promised to repay the instant loan to the network I in installments for five years from July 2005 to June 201. The above network H guaranteed Defendant E’s debt owed to Defendant E at that time.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2 and Eul evidence 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts of the determination as to the plaintiffs' assertion of the cause of claim, Defendant E is the principal debtor of the instant loan, and Defendant F and Defendant G are the heir of the network H, a joint guarantor, and are obligated to pay the plaintiffs, who are the heir of the deceased I, the creditor of the instant loan, to pay the amount equivalent to the shares inherited by the plaintiffs among the instant loan, unless there are special circumstances.
3. Determination on the assertion of extinctive prescription
A. Since the Defendant’s claim for the instant loan was a commercial claim, the instant loan claim was extinguished by the statute of limitations around June 2015, when five years elapsed since June 2010, which was the last repayment date of the instant loan claim, and as long as the instant loan claim has expired by the statute of limitations, the Defendant F and G’s joint and several guarantee claim also expired according to the subsidiary nature.
B. Even if the claim of this case was extinguished by the extinctive prescription, Defendant F’s debt was approved by remitting the amount of KRW 1,100,000 to the net I four times from April 25, 2012 to July 25, 2012, and thus, the instant loan obligation was also interrupted.
C. Article 47(1) of the Commercial Act provides that Article 47(1) shall apply.