beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly pay to the Plaintiff KRW 96,784,056 as well as KRW 61,565,320 as to the Plaintiff from July 25, 2018.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On March 29, 2012, Korea Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Bank”) granted a loan of KRW 68,000,000 to Defendant A on March 5, 2013 under the joint and several sureties’s joint and several sureties (the limit of collateral guarantee amount of KRW 81,60,000) by setting the extension period as March 5, 2013.
hereinafter referred to as the "loan of this case"
B) B. The instant principal and interest claim and its guarantee claim were transferred from the bank to the Plaintiff on May 9, 2018 through a limited liability company specializing in foreign exchange settlement. (c) The amount of the instant principal and interest claim outstanding as of July 24, 2018 (i.e., the outstanding principal and interest claim amounting to KRW 96,784,056 in total (i.e., the remaining principal and interest amounting to KRW 61,565,320 in interest of KRW 35,218,736 in interest of KRW 61,565,320). The agreed delay damages rate after the date is 17% per annum for the Defendant. [Grounds for recognition] The judgment made by the party who made a confession (Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act) against the Defendant: The absence of dispute, the purport of each entry and all pleadings, as well as the purport of all pleadings.
2. According to the allegations and the facts of the above determination, Defendant A and Defendant B, a joint guarantor, jointly with the Plaintiff, shall pay jointly the Plaintiff the sum of the principal and interest of this case outstanding as of July 24, 2018, KRW 96,784,056, and the remaining principal and interest of KRW 61,565,320 at the rate of 17% per annum from July 25, 2018 to the date of full payment, and Defendant B shall be liable to pay the Plaintiff damages for delay at the rate of KRW 81,60,000 per annum.
As to this, Defendant B asserted that, around 2012, the Defendants agreed to repay all of the obligations existing at the time to Defendant A and divorced each other, Defendant B did not bear joint and several liability with respect to the loan of this case, but there is no ground to deem that the above agreement between the Defendants did not have effect on the Plaintiff as a third party. Accordingly, this part of the above Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
Furthermore, Defendant B, the principal obligor, and the Plaintiff, prior to the Defendant A.