beta
Main Issues
The validity where a third party assumes overlapping obligations against the debtor's will;
Summary of Judgment
A. In the assumption of an obligation, it should be interpreted that, in the event of an assumption of an obligation, if the person who is exempted from liability or who is an overlapping underwriter is not certain;
(b) If a third party takes over an obligation overlappingly, it cannot be invalidated even if it goes against the intent of the original obligor.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 453 of the Civil Act
Plaintiff-Appellee
Shoho Lake
Defendant-Appellant
Cho Dong-ho
Judgment of the lower court
Jeonju District Court Decision 61No346 delivered on July 27, 1961, Jeonju District Court Decision 61Da346 delivered on July 27, 1961
Text
The appeal shall be dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal by the defendant's attorney are as follows.
According to the records of this case, even if the plaintiff did not directly lend the amount to the defendant at the hearing of the court below, it is clear that the defendant asserted that he takes over the obligation to the plaintiff at the branch office of Korea Insurance Co., Ltd. working for the defendant, and even if a third party who has no interest is unable to take over the obligation against the debtor's will, even if the third party takes over the obligation against the original debtor's will, it shall not be deemed null and void, and in the assumption of the obligation, it shall be interpreted that he takes over the obligation overlapping if the exempted underwriter or the overlapping underwriter is not clear in the assumption of the obligation, and the court below recognizes the fact that the defendant takes over the obligation to the plaintiff at the branch office of the above branch office by the evidence indicated in the original judgment, and judged that the defendant takes over the obligation to the plaintiff at the branch office of the above branch office, it shall not be accepted as an independent
Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating judges.
Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge)