The obligee's satisfaction of performance and priority of the obligor's appropriation

Even if the obligee and the obligor agreed that the obligee have the right to claim repayment at the time of opening a continuous monetary lending and borrowing relationship, if the obligor designated the repayment source to meet any obligation specifically, it will be appropriated for the repayment of the claim.

Article 476 of the Civil Act

Credit Guarantee Fund

Hong Tae-tae et al.

Seoul Central District Court (86 Gohap419) in the first instance trial

1. The part of the original judgment against the defendant Integrified Commercial Co., Ltd. is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

2. Of the original judgment, the part against the Defendants ordering payment in excess of the amount of KRW 12,508,029 per annum from February 13, 1985 to the full payment rate of KRW 19 percent per annum from February 13, 1985 shall be revoked and the corresponding part shall be dismissed. The Plaintiff’s claim corresponding thereto shall be dismissed.

3. The remainder of the appeal by Defendant Hong-tae and Dong Kim Yong-sik is dismissed.

4. Of the costs of lawsuit, the parts arising from the Plaintiff and the Defendant Insane Co., Ltd. are borne by both the Plaintiff and the second instance. The parts arising between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Hong, the Defendant Hong, and the Dong Kim Yong shall be divided into two parts, and one of them shall be borne by the Plaintiff and the remainder by the said Defendants.

The defendant Hong-tae, Dong Kim Yong-sik, jointly and severally with the co-defendants of the court below and the 31,080,554 won and the 19 percent interest rate per annum from February 13, 1985 to the full payment rate. The defendant Co., Ltd. shall pay the 10,000,000 won among the above 31,080,554 won and the 6 percent interest rate per annum from February 11, 1986 to the full payment rate.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendants and a declaration of provisional execution.

The original judgment shall be revoked.

The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

Litigation costs are assessed against all of the plaintiffs in the first and second instances.

In the event that the Plaintiff and the Joint Defendant Kim Jong-chul Co., Ltd. enter into a credit guarantee agreement with the Defendant Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “National Bank”) on Sep. 14, 1983 with respect to the obligation to repay the loan interest at discount of notes, they agreed to claim the above amount to be paid and interest at an annual rate of 19% from the date of performance, and Defendant Kim Yong-sik and Hong-chul Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff”) with the payment of the above amount to the Plaintiff 10, 150, 100, 300, 100, 300, 100, 100, 300,000 won, 10,000 won, 5,000 won, 10,000,000 won, 30,000 won, 10,0000 won, 18,000 won, 14,000,000.

The plaintiff is jointly and severally liable to pay the above amount of KRW 31,080,554 paid by the plaintiff to the National Bank on behalf of the plaintiff in accordance with the above joint and several guarantee contract, and the agreed interest rate of KRW 10,000 per annum from the above repayment date to the above amount of KRW 31,080,554, and the above interest rate of KRW 19% per annum. The defendant's video company, as the endorser of the third bill of this case, is liable to pay the above amount of KRW 10,000,000 as the lawful holder

Accordingly, the defendants are examined as to the first bill of this case and the third bill of this case, since they asserted that the amount equivalent to the respective monetary obligations of this case was repaid to the national bank on April 12, 1984 immediately after the above bill was defaulted.

In full view of Gap evidence Nos. 3 (Agreement on Banking Transactions), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 1, 2-1, 1-2 (Subject to Notice of Entrustment of Collection) and testimony from Hancheon-dong, and Mau-do, each of the preceding arguments, the court below held that if the amount repaid by the above Kim Young-chul at the time of the Bank Transaction Agreement is insufficient to extinguish the entire amount of the obligation, the National Bank and the above Kim Young-chul decided to repay the obligation in accordance with the order and method that the National Bank deems appropriate. The above Kim Young-chul requested collection of the total face value of 17,591,542 won and 14 won to the National Bank and collected the bill at the request of the National Bank, the fact that the bill No. 1 of this case and the third bill No. 1 of this case which were defaulted on each due date are appropriated for payment of the total amount of the obligation of the National Bank and the fact that the above third bill of this case was not trusted to the National Bank immediately after the collection of the witness, the collection of the amount of this case is different from the previous bill.

As to the facts found above, even if the agreement was made between the above Kim Heavy and the Korean bank that the Korean bank would have the right to the satisfaction of the obligation in the event that the payment would not extinguish the entire amount of the obligation as the payment source at the time when the transaction of the Promissory Notes was made, as long as the payment was made to the first bill of this case and the third bill of this case in the amount collected at the request of collection of the Promissory Notes and the check, the designation of the satisfaction of the obligation in the above Kim Heavy shall take precedence over the national bank's right to satisfaction of the obligation. Thus, the first bill of this case and the third bill of this case's obligation in the amount of KRW 7,150,000 and the third bill of this case's obligation in the amount of KRW 17,591,542 shall be deemed to have been fully extinguished.

Therefore, the plaintiff cannot claim reimbursement against the defendant Kim Yong-deok and Dong Hong-tae with the payment of the first bill of exchange and interest of this case on behalf of the national bank (the plaintiff's non-payment of debt is a separate issue to seek the return of the money to the national bank) and as long as the amount of the bill was paid by endorsement to the national bank, the legitimate holder of the third bill of exchange, the plaintiff cannot claim the amount of the bill payment to the defendant Cho Il-sung Co., Ltd., the endorser of this case.

Defendant, Kim Yong-sik, and Dong Hong-tae, and Lee Jong-tae, have accepted the national bank's discount obligation on the bill No. 2 of this case around May 1984 and repaid it around that time, and there is no evidence to acknowledge this, but there is no ground for the above defense.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against defendant Kim Yong-deok and Dong Hong-tae was accepted within the extent of the above recognition, on the ground that the plaintiff jointly and severally paid to the National Bank on February 13, 1985 the sum of 11,550,000 won in the second bill of this case and 958,029 won in interest thereon and 12,508,029 won in the second bill of this case and the interest thereon, and the amount of 958,029 won in the second bill of this case shall be deemed to have a duty to claim interest on the rate of 19% per annum from February 13, 1985 to the full payment date. In other words, the plaintiff's claim against defendant Kim Yong-deok and Dong Hong-tae shall be dismissed on the ground that there is no reason to reject the remaining claims against the defendants and the claims against the defendant Kim Jong-tae-tae, a different judgment of the court below, which ordered payment on the part of the defendant Kim Hong-sik and Dong-tae shall be dismissed by applying Article 989 of the plaintiff's appeal.

Judge Ga Jae-hwan (Presiding Judge)