beta
Text
1. Defendant C shall pay 57,600,000 won to the Plaintiff and 12% per annum from September 16, 2020 to the day of full payment.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C
A. On April 19, 2019, the Plaintiff, as an intermediary of Defendant B, lent KRW 57,600,000 to Defendant C (hereinafter “the instant loan”) at the maturity of payment on September 18, 2019.
(Confession) Domination. (b)
According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant C is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the above borrowed amount of KRW 57,600,000 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from September 16, 2020 to the day of full payment after the date of delivery of the complaint of this case, as sought by the Plaintiff.
2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C
A. The Plaintiff, which is the cause of the claim, asserts that the above loan agreement is based on the arrangement of Defendant B, and that, in the event that Defendant B is unable to repay the loan of this case, Defendant B agreed to pay the loan of this case, and that the above loan of this case was deposited into his own account. As such, Defendant B is liable for the above loan of this case or agreed to pay the loan of this case, Defendant B is jointly and severally liable with Defendant C.
B. First of all, according to the statement in Gap evidence No. 2, the fact that the loan of this case was deposited into the defendant B's account is recognized.
However, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the respective descriptions of Nos. 3 and 5 and the purport of the entire pleadings, are as follows: (a) the Plaintiff prepared a loan agreement (Evidence No. 3) with respect to the instant loan in the name of Defendant C; (b) Defendant B did not prepare a disposal document, such as the loan agreement; and (c) Defendant C only created a right to collateral security on the instant land, etc. at the time of Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu as a security for the said loan loan; and (d) Defendant C also appears to have concerns over causing problems with the execution of the right to collateral security on the said land, which was secured by Defendant C on the premise that it is the borrower of the loan loan of this case; and (c) Defendant B and this is related to the loan of this case.