Text
1. As to KRW 210,682,213 and KRW 209,890,254 among the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the year from June 13, 2019 to July 21, 2019.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff’s credit guarantee agreement 1) The Plaintiff Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”)
A) A credit guarantee agreement was concluded with a credit guarantee agreement, and the non-party company provided a credit guarantee to obtain a loan of KRW 100 million from a D bank on September 20, 2016, KRW 486 million on September 27, 2017, and KRW 100 million on September 27, 2017. (2) The Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the obligations under the credit guarantee agreement against the plaintiff of the non-party company.
B. The occurrence of a credit guarantee accident and the Plaintiff’s subrogation 1) caused a credit guarantee accident. On June 13, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 209,890,254, including the principal and interest of the loan, to D Bank according to the credit guarantee agreement with the non-party company. 2) The Plaintiff spent KRW 1,416,135, with respect to the credit guarantee of this case, the Plaintiff spent KRW 1,416,135 as the expenses for the preservation of the claim until June 26, 2019, and collected KRW 624,176 around that time.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 4 (including virtual number) and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 210,682,213 won (=209,890,254 won 1,416,135 won - 624,176 won) and 209,890,254 won, whichever is subrogated, from June 13, 2019 to July 21, 2019, the delivery date of the original copy of the payment order in this case, the agreed interest rate of 8% per annum, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.