beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. The Selected B Co., Ltd. shall be from April 29, 2015 for KRW 115,198,259 and KRW 84,768,144 among them.
Reasons
1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as a whole, facts in the separate sheet Nos. 1 to 4 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim Gap (including the branch numbers), are recognized.
Therefore, Appointed Co., Ltd., Ltd., Defendant (Appointed Party), and Appointed C are obligated to pay the Plaintiff the money stated in the Disposition No. 1.
2. Determination as to the assertion by the Appointor Co., Ltd., the Defendant (Appointed Party) and the Appointor C
A. On the assertion that the Selection Company B was liquidated, the Selection Company B closed its business, and it was actually liquidated, so that the Selection Company could not respond to the plaintiff's request. However, the above Selection did not complete the registration of the completion of liquidation, and even if such registration was completed, if it cannot be deemed that the liquidation work is completed, the liquidation corporation has the ability to be a party to the lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da3408, Apr. 22, 1997). Therefore, the above Selection's above assertion is without merit.
B. Defendant (Appointed Party) and Selected Party C’s assertion on the abolition of the joint and several guarantee system of Defendant (Appointed Party) and Appointed C’s motion to abolish the joint and several guarantee system of business operators from May 2012 by the Financial Services Commission. Thus, the Plaintiff’s motion cannot be complied with. However, since the loan of this case was made before the Financial Services Commission implemented the above policy, the above assertion by Defendant (Appointed Party) and Appointed C is without merit.
In addition, the credit extended to the existing joint and several sureties is reduced by step for the next five years, but in principle, the joint and several sureties is resolved at the time of contract revision, renewal and termination, and if the credit collection is inevitable, the policy is implemented to solve it by step for five years. In addition, the defendant (Appointed Party) appears not to be subject to the above policy as the representative director of the Appointed Company B.
Defendant (Appointed Party) and Appointed C.