logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2021.02.03 2019가단262345
구상금
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to Defendant B’s KRW 73,889,759 and KRW 73,682,249 among them, Defendant B from September 20, 2017 to November 27, 2019.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 23, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with Defendant B, through the Plaintiff’s Intervenor’s Intervenor (hereinafter “ Intervenor”), who is an agency entrusted with the Plaintiff’s business, the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with Defendant B, with the principal of credit guarantee, whereby the amount of KRW 72,00,000,000, out of the entire house loan funds that Defendant B received from the Intervenor’s Intervenors, shall be the principal of credit guarantee, and the term of credit guarantee was from December 23, 2014 to December 29, 2016 (hereinafter “credit guarantee agreement in this case”). On December 23, 2014, the Plaintiff issued the Housing Finance Credit Guarantee (Guarantee Number D) (hereinafter “Guarantee Number”).

According to the instant credit guarantee agreement, Defendant B shall reimburse the Plaintiff the amount of subrogated repayment and the amount of damages calculated by the rate prescribed in the said agreement (as of September 1, 2015, the rate of eight percent per annum after September 1, 2015), additional guarantee fees and expenses incurred in preserving claims, etc.

B. On December 30, 2014, Defendant B, the assistant intervenor’s loan to Defendant B and Defendant B’s neighboring pledge right, under the Plaintiff’s credit guarantee, loaned KRW 80,000,000,00 to the Plaintiff’s loan for the entire housing loan to the Seo-gu Incheon, Incheon, which is owned by the Defendant C (hereinafter “instant building”). On December 24, 2014, Defendant B concluded a contract to establish a neighboring pledge with the Intervenor as the pledgee for KRW 96,00,000,000,000 as the security for the instant loan (hereinafter “instant neighboring pledge”).

(c)

The Plaintiff’s repayment and the transferee of the neighboring pledge lost the benefit of the instant loan due to the default, etc., and the Plaintiff subrogated on September 19, 2017 to the Intervenors KRW 73,682,249 ( KRW 72 million + interest KRW 1,550,586 + interest KRW 131,663) upon the request of the Intervenors on September 19, 2017.

On the other hand, this case.

arrow