beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant A’s KRW 95,895,948 as well as 12% per annum from August 29, 2014 to August 31, 2015.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Defendants, “I wish to obtain necessary documents, such as a false lease agreement, and obtain a loan from a bank, and have divided the loan from the bank” from the name-free broker called “C office chief”, etc., received a proposal and subsequently agreed to do so in order, and Defendant B conspired to obtain a loan for the purpose of preparing a rental deposit, under the false lease agreement as Defendant A, introduced through D, leases an apartment house owned by the Defendant A.
B. On June 27, 2013, the Defendants conspired with D and Brokers in collusion with the Plaintiff’s consignment guarantee agency, and Defendant A did not intend to rent the Plaintiff E, 315 Dong 401, the Plaintiff’s ownership from Defendant B, and provided a credit guarantee to the Plaintiff at the same time. However, even if the Defendants thought that the loans were to be divided and divided as above, they could be concealed, the Defendants submitted documents such as a false lease contract, a down payment receipt, and a false certificate of employment created by Brokers, to the employees of one bank. At the same time, the Defendants filed an application for a household loan and requested credit guarantee against the Plaintiff.
C. On July 5, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a housing finance credit guarantee agreement with the term of July 5, 2015, stipulating that the guaranteed amount was KRW 94.5 million and the term of guarantee was until July 5, 2015 with respect to the Defendant Han Bank’s obligation to lend to the Defendant Han Bank. On the other hand, Han Bank transferred KRW 1.5 million in the name of the loan for housing lease to the national bank account in the name of Defendant B.
As Defendant A lost the benefit of the time limit for the above loan obligations to Han Bank, the Plaintiff subrogated for KRW 96,29,838 on August 29, 2014 pursuant to the above credit guarantee agreement, and as a result, the Plaintiff was 95,89,948 on behalf of the Plaintiff for the recovery of KRW 403,890 on the same day and appropriated the principal for the remainder of the subrogated payment.
E. The rate of damages for delay under the above credit guarantee agreement shall be 12% per annum from the date of subrogation until August 31, 2015.