beta
Text
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 37,687,868 and KRW 37,084,039 from October 16, 2017 to December 12, 2018.
Reasons
1. The facts of the cause of the claim are as shown in the annexed sheet;
[Ground of recognition] Defendant Company and C: Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208(3)2, Article 150(3) of the Civil Procedure Act), Defendant B: Each entry of evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 37,687,868 and KRW 37,084,039, whichever is less, 10% per annum from October 16, 2017 to December 17, 2018, and 15% per annum from the following day to the date of full payment.
3. Determination as to Defendant B’s assertion
A. On June 25, 2015, when Defendant B was in office as the president of Defendant Company’s monthly salary, Defendant B agreed to extend the credit guarantee term as a joint and several surety upon the Plaintiff’s request, even though he/she was jointly and severally guaranteed a credit guarantee agreement and retired from the president office on January 12, 2016, and agreed to extend the credit guarantee term as a joint and several surety. That said, Defendant B’s act of having himself/herself, who retired from the president office of Defendant Company, as a joint and several surety, bear the liability for the credit guarantee agreement
In light of the following: (a) there is no evidence to acknowledge that a joint and several surety is limited to a joint and several surety who is a joint and several surety at the time of the joint and several surety; and (b) where a company’s director concludes a guarantee contract for the company’s obligations with the maturity of payment specified for the company’s obligations, unlike the case of continuous guarantee or comprehensive collateral guarantee, it is impossible for the guarantor’s director to terminate the guarantee contract unilaterally for reasons of change in the position of director resignation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 90Da15501, Jul. 9, 191; 97Da35276, Jul. 24, 1998).
B. Defendant B is the case.