(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.10.16 2018나55104

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.10.16 2018나55104

양수금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

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

Reasons

1. The Industrial Bank of Korea concluded a credit card use contract with B (hereinafter “B”), and jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s obligation to use the credit card payment owed by B in relation to the above contract, the Bank’s delay in the payment of the credit card use payment to the Industrial Bank of Korea and lost the benefit of time on March 23, 2010, and the above credit card use payment claim (hereinafter “instant claim”) was transferred from the Industrial Bank of Korea to the Plaintiff through the first loan company for the first time, UPP C&C loan, U.S. Co., Ltd., Ltd., and UPP C&C loan was transferred to the Plaintiff on July 8, 2016. The above notice was delivered to the Defendant around that time, and as of September 30, 2011, the principal of the instant claim was either no dispute between the parties or acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as stated in subparagraphs 1 through 3.

According to the above facts of recognition, unless there are special circumstances, the defendant who is a joint guarantor is liable to pay 2,352,515 won and delay damages to the plaintiff who is the transferee of the bonds.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense, etc.

A. The Defendant’s defense of extinctive prescription and its determination against the Defendant’s claim of this case are defense that the statute of limitations had already expired before the Plaintiff’s transfer of the claim. Thus, the starting point of calculating the statute of limitations of this case’s claim of this case is as seen earlier on March 23, 2010 where arrears occurred. The Plaintiff filed an application for the payment order for the instant claim of this case from October 30, 2017, which was five years after the expiration of the statute of limitations of commercial claim from the starting point of the foregoing date. It is apparent in the record that the instant claim of this case was extinguished due to the completion of the statute of limitations.

Therefore, the defendant's defense is justified.

(b).

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.10.13 2019나67960

-수원지방법원 2018.05.18 2017나76869

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.14 2017가단5160777

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.01.17 2019나37891

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.01.26 2015가단5242699