beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. As to KRW 44,496,509 and KRW 44,301,229 among them, Defendant A shall be from October 16, 2014 to August 31, 2015.
Reasons
1. Determination on the remainder of the Defendants except Defendant G
A. On May 4, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with Defendant A on the amount of KRW 45,000,000 for the Workers’ Housing Lease Fund borrowed from the Industrial Bank of Korea.
According to the above credit guarantee agreement, when the plaintiff has fulfilled the guaranteed obligation, the amount of money, damages, and incidental expenses shall be paid immediately, and where the person who has received the credit guarantee fails to discharge the guaranteed obligation due to the failure to discharge the obligation by the due date, additional guarantee fees may be paid for the amount of the obligation guaranteed by the person who received the credit guarantee, and where the liability for the performance of the guaranteed obligation is not cancelled, additional guarantee fees may be paid for the amount of the obligation not discharged. The expenses incurred in the execution, preservation
The rate of damages determined by the Plaintiff is 12% per annum from December 1, 2012 to August 31, 2015, and 8% per annum from the next day to that of the date.
B) As Defendant A lost the benefit of the above loan, the Industrial Bank of Korea claimed the Plaintiff to discharge the guaranteed obligation. On October 15, 2014, the Plaintiff subrogated for KRW 44,301,229 of the guaranteed interest to the Industrial Bank of Korea. (2) Defendants D et al. to make a false loan contract and to obtain the loan of the entire loan by deceiving the bank as a method of manipulating documents as if the lessee entered into a false loan contract and works for the company. Defendant D et al. to manage the entire loan process with the total liability of the above loan fraud group; Defendant E et al. to manipulate the relevant documents, such as a certificate of employment, as the operator of K Co., Ltd. actually works for the company; Defendant C et al. to manipulate the relevant documents according to Defendant D’s direction.