beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's claim extended by this court is dismissed.
3...
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is the same as that of the judgment of the first instance except for the part added as stated in paragraph (2) below. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this case by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The addition;
A. In addition to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, the following is added to the third-party judgment of the first instance.
Furthermore, an act of borrowing money to raise funds to use for a business operated in the same occupation constitutes an auxiliary commercial activity conducted for a business, and an act of borrowing money constitutes also an obligation arising out of the said commercial activity and the period of extinctive prescription of five years applies as commercial bonds (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da9260, Aug. 26, 1997). The following is added to “reasonable” in Chapter 16 of the first instance judgment.
(A) The Plaintiff asserts that the instant loan is merely a general civil claim unrelated to the Defendant’s business. However, in light of the overall purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff’s loan from the Defendant to the Defendant upon the request of the Defendant to request for a loan of funds to be invested in the coal mine-related business that the Plaintiff will run in Indonesia as a partnership business, the Plaintiff may recognize the fact of lending the instant loan to the Defendant. According to the above fact of recognition, the instant loan claim cannot be viewed as a commercial claim arising from a monetary loan which is an ancillary commercial activity for the Defendant.)
B. 1) The Plaintiff asserts that the extinctive prescription was interrupted at this time since the Defendant approved the Defendant’s obligation to the instant loan on or around August 2012. 2) The recognition of the obligation as the ground for the waiver of extinctive prescription as the ground for the waiver of the benefit of extinctive prescription can be granted in an implied manner, but at least, the existence of the obligation owed by the obligor against the obligee.