logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.11.13 2015나50466
대여금
Text

1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

Reasons

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the part of the first instance judgment, except for the defendant’s addition of the following determination as to the assertion of an additional argument in the trial, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. In addition, Defendant B asserts that, “When the repayment date of a debt under this Agreement has been extended with the consent of the guarantor, the guarantor shall continue to comply with the agreement under Article 1.” However, Defendant B did not agree with the extension of the repayment date, Defendant B’s surety obligation is extinguished after the lapse of December 4, 2007, which is the repayment date of a loan.

However, according to the evidence No. 1 of the Credit Agreement, Article 9(6) of the Credit Agreement provides that "if the repayment date of the obligation under this Agreement has been extended with the consent of the guarantor, the guarantor shall continue to comply with the agreement under Article 1." However, if the guarantor does not consent to the extension of the repayment date of the guaranteed obligation, the guarantor shall be liable for the guarantee only for the obligation incurred until the previous repayment date, and if the repayment date of the guaranteed obligation has been extended without the consent of the guarantor, the guarantee liability is not extinguished.

Therefore, the above assertion that Defendant B’s guarantee obligation extinguished after the lapse of December 4, 2007, which was the initial repayment date, is without merit.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendants is accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the defendants' appeal is dismissed on the grounds of its merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow