(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.22 2014가단5187306

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.01.22 2014가단5187306

양수금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. (1) On May 27, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with C to set the guaranteed principal of KRW 49,50,000, and the guarantee period from May 27, 2010 to May 26, 201, and D jointly and severally guaranteed the Plaintiff’s obligation.

(2) C was granted a loan of KRW 49,500,000 from Han Bank, but a guarantee accident occurred, and the Plaintiff subrogated for the said Han Bank on October 12, 201 under the aforementioned credit guarantee agreement.

(3) As of May 27, 2014, D as of May 27, 2014, is a joint and several surety C, and D is obligated to pay the Plaintiff totaling KRW 42,562,234.

B. (1) On January 20, 2006, D entered into a lease agreement with Defendant A, B, and Ansan-si, with respect to the lease deposit amount of KRW 48,00,000 and the lease term of KRW 203 (hereinafter “instant building”) from February 28, 2006 to February 27, 2008, and on May 25, 2010, D transferred the Plaintiff’s claim for the return of the lease deposit (hereinafter “instant lease deposit”).

(2) On May 27, 2010, the Plaintiff notified Defendant A and B of the fact of the assignment of claims by content-certified mail on behalf of the Plaintiff, but each notification was returned due to the absence of closure, and on June 9, 2010, the Plaintiff sent the notice of the said assignment of claims to the Geumcheon-gu Seoul Facro 25 Dong328, which is the workplace address of Defendant B, as of June 9, 2010.

(3) Around October 2011, D demanded the Defendants to cancel the instant lease agreement. On October 25, 2011, the Defendants returned KRW 47,931,520 to D, the remainder after deducting public charges, etc. from the lease deposit.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 to 9 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff argued by the parties that he sent a notice of assignment to the workplace address of the defendant B, and that he reached the defendant B, and the defendants objection to the plaintiff.

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 상주지원 2013.12.03 2013고단353

-서울중앙지방법원 2019.07.23 2018가단5244450

-서울서부지방법원 2015.03.23 2014가단248751

-서울북부지방법원 2014.02.18 2012가단52509

-서울동부지방법원 2015.11.10 2014가합7597