Industrial Bank of Korea (Limited LLC, Attorneys Kang Jong-young et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Gyeonggi Credit Guarantee Foundation (Law Firm Rotex, Attorneys Kim Yoon-kin, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

June 8, 2016

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Da5352742 Decided April 12, 2016

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. Purport of claim

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 180,000,000 won with 4% interest per annum from June 27, 2014 to July 24, 2014, 4.61% interest per annum from the next day to the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

2. Purport of appeal

The part of the judgment of the first instance against the defendant shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above revocation shall be dismissed.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s reasoning is as follows: (a) the Defendant’s assertion on the failure of a credit guarantee contract is identical to the part of the judgment of the first instance, except for an additional determination as provided in paragraph (2) below; and (b) thus, the same is acceptable pursuant to the main sentence of

2. The addition;

The defendant asserts that the credit guarantee relationship under this guarantee is not established between the plaintiff and the defendant because Article 5 (1) of the Credit Guarantee Terms and Conditions provides that "a loan will be handled only when it satisfies all of the following subparagraphs." 1. 2. 3. 3. 6. 3. 60 days after the credit guarantee notification date, and a loan will be implemented in whole or in part within 60 days from the credit guarantee notification date." Thus, the defendant's credit guarantee relationship should be interpreted as "where all of the credit guarantee conditions are not met within 60 days from the credit guarantee notification date, the non-party's credit guarantee relationship does not exist within 60 days from the notification date of the credit guarantee (the full repayment of the loan in this case)" and the defendant's credit guarantee relationship cannot be interpreted as "a loan will be executed in whole or in part within 60 days from the notification date of the loan in this case."

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Osung U.S. (Presiding Judge)