beta
Text
1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
purport, purport, and.
Reasons
Basic Facts
Pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, the part on “1. Basic Facts” in the judgment of the first instance is cited.
Judgment
At the first instance court, the plaintiffs asserted that the defendant borrowed the construction cost and the price of goods from the plaintiffs as members of G, or that they expressed their intent to jointly and severally with D after borrowing the money as representatives of D, and that the defendant led to the confession of the facts alleged by the plaintiffs at the fourth hearing of the first instance court.
As to this, the defendant was found to have made confession in the first instance trial, but this is alleged to be a confession that was made in a false manner to draw favorable judgments to the plaintiffs in consultation with the plaintiffs and their legal representatives, and the confession was revoked.
However, a party who revokes a confession is not presumed to be a confession by mistake on the ground that the confession violates the truth, as well as the fact that the confession is a confession by mistake, and that the confession is proved to be contrary to the truth (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 89Meu14240, Jun. 26, 1990; 94Da22897, Sept. 27, 1994). However, even if the defendant's assertion that he made a false confession with intent to lead a favorable judgment to the plaintiffs, it is clear that the confession by mistake is not a confession by mistake, and it is insufficient to prove that the entries in the recording of the record submitted by the defendant in the trial alone are contrary to the truth, and there is no other sufficient evidence.
Therefore, the defendant's confessions in court against the facts alleged by the plaintiffs still remains effective. As such, the defendant's repayment of the above loan obligation to the plaintiff Gap corporation, 42,98,000 won, 18,724,400 won to the plaintiff Eul, and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from August 28, 2014 to the date of full payment, etc.