beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly pay to the Plaintiff KRW 63,00,000 and the interest rate pertaining thereto from November 18, 2016 to the day of full payment.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On July 17, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendants: (a) lent KRW 28 million to Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”); and (b) jointly, the Defendants, etc. drafted a notarial deed of monetary loan for consumption with the content that the Plaintiff would jointly repay KRW 15 million until August 21, 2015, and KRW 13 million until October 31 of the same year.
B. On July 17, 2015, the Defendants prepared and delivered to the Plaintiff a notarial deed of promissory notes issued jointly by the Defendants, with the payee’s face value of KRW 50,000,000,000,000,000 for the Plaintiff.
[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 and 2, purport of the whole pleadings]
2. Determination:
A. According to the above facts, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are jointly obligated to pay to the Plaintiff damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from November 18, 2016 to the date of full payment, which is the following day when the copy of the complaint was delivered to the Defendants as requested by the Plaintiff, as the total amount of KRW 13 million, excluding KRW 15 million, 15 million, excluding KRW 15 million, which was paid by the Plaintiff, and KRW 50 million based on the notarial deed of promissorysory notes, and the amount of KRW 63 million,00,000,000 based on which the Plaintiff had already been paid.
B. The Defendants asserted that the Defendants’ obligations based on each of the above notarial deeds were all repaid by Defendant C. However, the Plaintiff and Defendant C have only a total of KRW 60 million to be borne by the said Defendant pursuant to the evidence No. 3 (Guarantee) drafted on November 20, 2015 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant C, and therefore, the Defendants’ obligations based on each of the above notarial deeds do not exist.
According to Gap evidence No. 3, it is recognized that the plaintiff and defendant C prepared a letter of undertaking that the above defendant will pay six times the credit purchase amount of KRW 100,410,00 to the plaintiff on November 20, 2015.