beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 20,408,674 won and KRW 6,172,862 among them.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. Defendant A borrowed money from a foreign exchange credit card company, and Defendant B and C jointly guaranteed the above loan obligations at the time of the above loan. The Defendants failed to pay KRW 6,783,326 out of the above loan.
The above loans were assigned in sequence to Solomon Co., Ltd. and Solomon Mutual Savings Bank (hereinafter “ Solomon Mutual Savings Bank”), and transferred on July 31, 2003 to EMM company specialized in the securitization of assets, and the fact of the assignment of assets was notified to the Defendants.
B. On November 1, 2005, the SIM company specialized in the SIM-backed securitization filed a payment order with the Daejeon District Court to request the Defendants to pay the transfer money, and the said court received the payment order with the purport that “The Defendants jointly and severally received 11,496,400 won to the IMS company specialized in the IMS-backed securitization and 6,783,326 won a year of 20% per annum from September 10, 2005 to the date of full payment, and the payment order was finalized on November 25, 2005.”
C. On April 2008, a limited liability company specializing in the EM company transferred the above loans to Solomon Mutual Savings Bank, and notified the Defendants of the assignment of the claims. D.
On April 10, 2009, the Plaintiff acquired the claim for the above loan from Solomon Mutual Savings Bank, was delegated with the power to notify the assignment of claims by Solomon Mutual Savings Bank, and notified the Defendant of the above transfer on December 2, 2009.
E. As of December 3, 2013, the above loan claims amounted to KRW 6,172,862 as principal, interest and delay damages amounting to KRW 14,235,812 as of December 3, 201, and KRW 20,408,674 as of KRW 17% per annum between a foreign exchange credit card company and a foreign exchange credit card company.
[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The above-mentioned facts are examined as to the cause of the claim.