logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.11.01 2016가단5175116
양수금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The facts stated in the attached Form No. 1, which the plaintiff asserted as the cause of the claim in this case, do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged by considering the whole purport of the pleading in Gap evidence No. 1.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff who acquired the first claim of the financial institution (Ssung Capital Co., Ltd.) the balance of principal and interest 24,914,221 won and delay damages for the principal 6,830,873 won among them, barring any special circumstances.

2. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the Plaintiff’s claim of this case was fully repaid, or that the statute of limitations expired due to the lapse of ten years since it was not notified.

B. Article 165 of the Civil Act provides that the period of extinctive prescription of a claim established by a judgment that has the same effect as a final and conclusive claim or a judgment shall be ten years, even if the claim constitutes a short-term extinctive prescription, is effective only between the parties to the relevant judgment, etc.

Even if the above parties are joint and several sureties, the above final judgment, etc. does not affect the prescription period, and the extinctive prescription period of the joint and several sureties's joint and several sureties's joint and several sureties's joint and several

In addition, the guaranteed obligation is subordinate to the principal obligation.

Even if the guaranteed obligation is independent of the principal obligation, and Article 440 of the Civil Code provides that the interruption of the prescription against the principal obligor shall be effective against the surety, but this is not based on the subsidiary nature of the guaranteed obligation, but rather on the special provision for the protection of the obligee or for the securing of the collateral for the principal obligor, the interruption of prescription against the principal obligor.

arrow