(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2011.11.30 2011나44275

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2011.11.30 2011나44275

대여금반환

Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. B, on October 9, 2006, borrowed KRW 50,000,00 from the Plaintiff at an interest rate of 2.2% per month, and on October 31, 2009, the due date for repayment of the loan (hereinafter “the instant loan”). At that time, the Plaintiff received registration of the establishment of a collateral security right to the Plaintiff with respect to the land, other than 1193 square meters and six parcels owned by the Defendant, as the collateral amount for the said loan debt, 60,000,000 won as the maximum debt amount, as the collateral amount for the said loan debt.

B. On November 7, 2009, the Plaintiff confirmed that the overdue interest from September 30, 2009 to September 30, 2009 was KRW 12,200,000.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 4, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s debt of the loan of this case as at the time of the loan of this case. As such, the Plaintiff sought payment of interest and delay damages from October 1, 2009 as to the principal amount of KRW 62,200,000 and the principal amount of KRW 50,000,000.

B. Although there is no dispute between the parties that the following stamp image after the name of the defendant in the joint and several surety column for the loan certificate (Evidence A 2) is based on the seal of the defendant, the defendant's name is stated in the joint and several surety column for the loan certificate and the seal of the defendant can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the whole pleadings. The entries in the loan certificate No. 5 alone are insufficient to deem that B has the right to affix the defendant's seal, and unless there is any other evidence to support it, it cannot be used as evidence. The entries in the loan certificate No. 3 and 5 alone are insufficient to recognize that the defendant is a joint and several surety with the defendant's real guarantee for the loan obligation of this case in this case, and there is no other evidence to support this otherwise, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and among the judgment of the court of first instance.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2011.11.30 2011나44275

-서울북부지방법원 2015.03.25 2014가합3126

-서울중앙지방법원 2015.05.27 2013가합559890

-의정부지방법원고양지원 2017.04.05 2016가단16255

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.11.09 2017가단19585