beta
Text
1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On December 22, 2008, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 25,000,000 to B, who served as a military noncommissioned officer on the basis of a loan support system for lease of key money for lease on a deposit basis (hereinafter “instant loan”).
The loan of this case was extended on March 21, 2010, but the loan of this case thereafter was extended on March 21, 2014.
B. B died on November 1, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”), and the Defendant is the wife of the deceased at the time of the instant loan and the said death.
C. Meanwhile, in order to secure the performance of the obligation under the instant loan, the Plaintiff received guaranty insurance policy (the insured: the Plaintiff and the insured amount: KRW 20,188,525) issued by Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. (the insured amount: KRW 20,188,525). On February 10, 2015, the Plaintiff collected insurance money from Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. on the grounds of the nonperformance of the obligation under the said loan, and received KRW 20,188,525 and appropriated it in the order of the principal
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, 6 and 7, and purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Deceased is the Defendant’s husband at the time of the instant loan, and the Defendant is obligated to repay the instant loan in accordance with Article 832 of the Civil Act, inasmuch as the Defendant consumeds the instant loan in the daily home of the Defendant’s husband by borrowing the instant loan from the Defendant’s husband at the time of the instant loan, and then appropriating it to the Plaintiff for payment of insurance money, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder to the Plaintiff the principal of the loan remaining after appropriating the remainder to the Plaintiff as the principal of the loan and its delay damages. 2) Since the Defendant’s loan borrowed from the Plaintiff was not appropriated for the money for lease on a deposit basis or the cost of living for the communal living of the Defendant couple
B. Determination is in accordance with Article 832 of the Civil Act.