logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.11.22 2016가단218105
사용료
Text

1. Defendant B shall pay 20,860,000 won to the Plaintiff and 15% per annum from August 24, 2016 to the date of full payment.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the claim against Defendant A

A. The Plaintiff asserts that on May 19, 2015, Defendant A jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s obligation to pay KRW 69,798,40,00, the unpaid amount of service use fees of C and D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) to the Defendant.

The defendant B prepared a seal stamp attached to the name of the defendant A as stated in the evidence No. 3-1 (joint guarantee paper, hereinafter referred to as the "written statement of payment in this case"), and affixed a seal affixed to the seal held by him under the name of the defendant A. The defendant A served as the representative director of the non-party company, but the actual operation was in charge of the defendant A, and the defendant A delegated all of his powers related to the operation of the non-party company to the defendant B. The defendant B prepared a joint and several sureties's seal stamp book (Evidence No. 4) on June 14, 2013 on the unpaid amount of 77,000,000 won for the service use fee of the non-party corporation in the name of the defendant A, and written a promissory note as to the above amount as the agent of the defendant A on the same day, or prepared a notarized promissory note as to it by the number Nos. 1 through 5, 1, and 6 (hereinafter the same shall apply).

However, in light of the fact that Defendant A delegated all the rights related to the operation of the non-party company to Defendant A, it is difficult to deem that Defendant A delegated the said company’s right to stand a joint and several surety with an individual status, and that Defendant B’s seal imprint signed and sealed on the instant payment note is not a seal imprint of Defendant A, unlike the joint and several surety attachment note as of June 14, 2013, it is difficult to see that the instant payment note was genuinely prepared by Defendant A’s intent, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the authenticity, and thus, it shall be admitted as evidence as to Defendant A’s joint and several liability.

arrow