The validity of loans to members of a credit union without a resolution of the board of directors (negative)

Examining the provisions of Article 27, Article 29 subparag. 5, Article 31(1)2, and Article 32 of the Credit Unions Act, it is reasonable to interpret that loans to members of a credit union must be made only through a resolution of the board of directors of the union, and that loans to members shall be null and void without a resolution of the board of directors.

Article 27, Article 29 subparag. 5, Article 31(1)2, and Article 32 of the Credit Unions Act

Bad Credit Cooperatives (Law Firm Han, Attorneys Park Don et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Thai-man (Law Firm Bupyeong General Law Office, Attorneys Nam-sung et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Suwon District Court Decision 95Na7465 delivered on December 8, 1995

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Suwon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Summary of the judgment below

The court below, based on its evidence, established 18 promoters, who were non-party 2, as a credit union established on April 6, 1992 with the establishment authorization of the above 20 won on March 9, 192, and completed the registration of incorporation on April 6, 1992. The above old employees worked as the president of the plaintiff from March 3, 1993 after the establishment. The defendant, around October 18, 1991 when the above old employees were established, failed to comply with the articles of association and all other provisions, and did not provide the above 10 won to the plaintiff as 60 won for damages under the premise that the above old employees were not liable for damages under the premise that the above 20 won were not liable for damages due to the above 00 won, which was the above 10th of May 1, 1991 to May 1, 1994. The court below rejected the plaintiff's above 200 won as 90 won for the above financial statements or 20000 won for the above reasons.

2. Judgment on the grounds of appeal

However, considering all the provisions of Article 27, Article 29 subparagraph 5, Article 31 (1) subparagraph 2, and Article 32 of the Credit Unions Act, loans to members of a credit union must be made only through a resolution of the board of directors of the union, and as long as loans to members are made without the resolution of the board of directors, it shall be interpreted that the loans to the above members shall be null and void. Therefore, in this case, the above principal person must have passed a resolution of the board of directors of the above loans on the premise that the above principal person obtained loans from the plaintiff and borrowed loans of 26,00,000 won and the liability for damages to the former is extinguished. If the resolution of the board of directors of the above principal on the above loans were not made by the plaintiff, it shall not be extinguished because new loans to the above principal have not been made due to the reasons not known to the parties.

Therefore, the court below should have deliberated on whether the above person was a resolution of the board of directors when receiving a loan of KRW 26,00,000 from the plaintiff, and then should have judged whether the above liability for damages was extinguished. However, it cannot be said that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the extinguishment of the guaranteed obligation, since the court below's determination that the above amount was not liable for damages by obtaining a loan from the plaintiff from the plaintiff (it is not clear whether the purport of the above approval was the representative of the plaintiff or the approval of the board of directors was obtained or the purport was that the above approval was obtained or the approval was obtained from the plaintiff's board of directors) without doing so.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all Justices who reviewed the case.

Justices Lee Yong-hun (Presiding Justice)