beta
Text
1. A joint and several surety contract between the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) on the principal debtor B on December 4, 2013.
Reasons
Basic Facts
B borrowed 3 million won to the Defendant on December 4, 2013, and the interest rate and overdue interest rate were 39% per annum, and the loan period was 60 months.
At the time of the loan agreement, the Plaintiff prepared to the effect that the Plaintiff is jointly and severally and severally guaranteed within the maximum amount of KRW 4.17,000,000, and submitted to the Defendant a copy of the Plaintiff’s resident registration certificate, a copy of the Plaintiff’s business bank account entry and withdrawal statement in the Plaintiff’s name, along with the joint and several guarantee
(B) From the following day, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) there is no dispute over the instant joint and several surety contract; (b) there is no dispute; (c) Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 4; and (d) the purport of the entire pleadings; and (d) the claim of the principal lawsuit and the main claim for counterclaim; (c) the Plaintiff forged the instant joint and several surety contract by stealing the name of the Plaintiff; and (d) the Plaintiff did not sign the contract; and (d) the Plaintiff sought confirmation of
The Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff signed the instant joint and several liability contract and submitted it to the Defendant, and that the Defendant, as the principal of the principal of the loan as of April 20, 2016, filed a claim for delay damages in accordance with the agreed interest rate with respect to KRW 3,225,076 as of April 20, and the principal of the loan as of April 20, 2016.
Judgment
Article 3(1) of the Special Act on the Protection of guarantors, which was amended by Act No. 13125, Feb. 3, 2015; which was enforced on February 4, 2016, provides that “A guarantee shall take effect only when the relevant physician indicates in writing his/her name and seal or signature.”
The provisions of the above provision are transferred to the main sentence of Article 428-2(1) of the Civil Act, Article 3(1) of the Special Act for the Protection of Surety, which is Act No. 13125 on February 3, 2015.
According to these legal principles, it is necessary to determine whether there is the name and seal or signature of the plaintiff who is a joint and several surety.