beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 25,00,000 as well as 5% per annum from September 19, 2014 to January 17, 2019 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. (1) On June 27, 2013, the conclusion of the instant guarantee insurance contract, etc., the Plaintiff entered into a performance guarantee insurance contract (hereinafter “instant guarantee insurance contract”) with the Plaintiff as the insured (hereinafter “C”) and with the insurance company as D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) to guarantee the credit price for C’s D within the insurance coverage amount of KRW 50 million from June 14, 2013 to June 13, 2014 (hereinafter “instant guarantee insurance contract”).
(2) The instant guarantee insurance contract was concluded by means of electronic signature, and the joint and several guarantee contract was concluded with the content that guarantees the obligation of C to the Plaintiff under the instant guarantee insurance contract by means of a digital signature using each authorized certificate of H, H, I, J, and K, with the content that guarantees the obligation of C to the Plaintiff by means of an electronic signature using each authorized certificate of H, I, J, and K, on the same day, under the condition that C’s representative director, five natural persons and one corporation’s joint and several guarantee should be provided.
B. After the payment of insurance proceeds, upon occurrence of an insurance accident that C did not pay the price of goods, D filed a claim with the Plaintiff for the payment of insurance proceeds on August 28, 2014, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 50 million of insurance proceeds to D on September 18, 2014.
C. (1) The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Suwon District Court 2014Kadan68378, which is the principal debtor of the instant guaranteed insurance contract, and its joint and several sureties, seeking reimbursement of reimbursement from Suwon District Court 2014Kadan68378.
In the above lawsuit, E, F, H, I, and J alleged to the effect that each authorized certificate used at the time of the above joint and several sureties contract was issued without permission, and that there was no joint and several sureties, and the defendant participated in the lawsuit as the supplementary intervenor of the plaintiff.