logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.10.07 2015나10898
보증채무금
Text

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

On January 14, 2010, the Plaintiff leased KRW 3,000,000 per annum to B on January 14, 2010, at an interest rate of 48.8% per annum, at an overdue interest rate of 48.9% per annum, at an overdue interest rate of 60.9% from the date of entering into a loan contract, and the

B repaid 115,060 won to the Plaintiff, and delayed repayment of the principal and interest of the loan, thereby losing the benefit of July 2, 2014, and on October 2, 2014, the remaining principal and interest of the loan as of October 2, 2014 are KRW 2,884,940.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute and the plaintiff's primary claim for the purport of the whole pleadings, the defendant asserted that the defendant jointly and severally guaranteed B's debt by preparing a joint and several guarantee contract (Evidence A 1).

Even if the defendant did not prepare a joint and several surety contract, the defendant prepared a promissory note as his own seal imprint and received a certificate of personal seal impression, etc., the defendant can be deemed as having ratified the act of unauthorized representation of the maker by verifying the intention of joint and several surety contract with the plaintiff, or by confirming the intention of joint and several surety by telephone communications with the plaintiff.

Judgment

In addition, the evidence No. 1 submitted by the plaintiff cannot be used as evidence since there is no evidence to acknowledge the authenticity of the evidence, and only the evidence Nos. 2 and 3 is insufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the debt of the loan, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

In addition, Article 3 (1) of the Special Act on the Protection of sureties provides that "a guarantee shall take effect only when the intention is written with the name and seal or signature of the guarantor." However, the expression of intent of the guarantee requires the document with the name and seal or signature of the guarantor. On the other hand, it is more clear means of confirmation as to the existence and content of the guarantee by clearly indicating the intention, and on the other hand, it does not reach the guarantee by the guarantor as soon as possible.

arrow