logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2018.08.28 2018가단22640
구상금등
Text

1. Defendant Incorporated Co., Ltd. and Defendant B jointly and severally with the Plaintiff KRW 179,902,862 and 178.

Reasons

The Plaintiff is a government-funded institution established under the Credit Guarantee Fund Act, and the Defendant Incorporated Stock A (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Company”) is a principal agent following the conclusion of a credit guarantee agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company, and the Defendant B is a representative director of the Defendant Company, and is a joint and several obligor who jointly and severally guaranteed

On April 15, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement between the Defendant Company with the credit guarantee principal of KRW 351,000,000, and the credit guarantee period from April 15, 2016 to April 15, 2024. Under the said agreement, the Plaintiff issued a credit guarantee agreement with the Daiju Financial Center of the New Bank of Korea on April 15, 2016, with the guarantee number C, the guaranteed amount of KRW 351,00,000, the guaranteed amount of KRW 351,000,000, and the guarantee period of April 15, 2024.

Under the above credit guarantee certificate, the defendant company borrowed gold 390,000,000 won from the above bank in general financing, but thereafter, the defendant company suffered a credit guarantee accident as the creditor's provisional attachment decision was made in the business place around April 2017.

Accordingly, with respect to the Plaintiff’s assertion of the claim for reimbursement amount of KRW 178,857,194 on behalf of the said bank and the claim for substitute payment of KRW 1,045,668, the Defendants do not clearly dispute this in this Court.

(1) The plaintiff's claim against the defendant for revocation of the plaintiff's fraudulent act is clearly disputed in the response, etc., but the plaintiff withdrawn the lawsuit against the defendant D on August 16, 2018, and the defendant D consented thereto) / [the grounds for recognition] the each entry of Gap's evidence 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleading, and so, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants shall be accepted for reasons.

arrow