beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 23, 1998, the Defendant borrowed 12 million won from the National Bank under a joint and several surety C.
B. Since then, on May 18, 2001, the Defendant failed to repay the above loans, and C subrogated to KRW 11,600,000 for the principal and interest of loans to the Defendant’s national bank.
C. On May 25, 2001, the Defendant drafted a notarial deed of debt repayment contract (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) with the following content as a notary public No. 1976 at No. 1976 of the Daegu High-dong Law Office No. 2001.
On September 23, 1998: The repayment method on May 30, 2004: 33,000 won as of the end of each month from June 30, 2001 to April 30, 2004; the repayment method shall be 345,000 won as of May 30, 200.
Interest: 7.8% (the end of each month from June 30, 2001 to May 30, 2004 as of the end of each month): When a debtor falls under any of the following subparagraphs, the debtor shall, as a matter of course, lose the benefit of time for the above obligation, and immediately repay all of the remainder of the obligation, even if there is no other notification or peremptory notice from the creditor:
3. A debtor who delays payment in installments or payment of interest once;
d.
C transferred the claim based on the Notarial Deed to the Plaintiff on July 1, 2008, and the Plaintiff actually repaid part of the Defendant’s debt to the Defendant’s wife D as the agent of C.
From September 12, 2008, KRW 500,000 on September 12, 2008, and KRW 1,000,00 on September 1, 200 of the same year were repaid as part of the obligation under the notarial deed of this case.
E. C on January 15, 2009, notified the Defendant of the transfer of a claim based on the instant notarial deed.
[Reasons for Recognition] The descriptions of Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4-1, 2, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant did not repay the plaintiff the debt based on the notarial deed of this case.