beta
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the lower court determined that the first ground for nonperformance under Article 13.01(e) of the instant loan agreement occurred, on the ground that it is reasonable to view that the Fund had reached the situation where “the Fund becomes unable to repay its debts upon maturity due to financial uncertainty.”
In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on the interpretation of a disposition document, or by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation
Meanwhile, the lower court’s determination that “it is sufficient to deem that the principal and interest of the instant loan obligations fall under the cause of nonperformance stipulated in Article 13.01(a) of the instant loan agreement even in itself, even if the principal and interest of the instant loan obligations have not been repaid within five days from the maturity of the maturity date is merely an additional judgment that does not affect the conclusion of the judgment, and thus, the allegation in the grounds of appeal that the said additional judgment was erroneous in
2. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, the lower court cited the first instance judgment, and determined that the proviso of Article 13.01 (e) of the Loan Contract of this case grants the recovery period only when the ground for nonperformance was caused by a third party’s act and the recovery is possible. The ground for nonperformance, such as the loss of the ability to repay debts of the Fund, etc. of this case, is not by a third party’s act, but not by a healing nature, and thus, the proviso of
In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above judgment of the court below is just.