beta
Text
1. The Defendants jointly pay to the Plaintiff KRW 170,000,000,000 to the day of full payment, from June 8, 2018.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On December 9, 2012, Defendant C borrowed KRW 170,000,000 among the Defendants, and Defendant B guaranteed this.
B. On October 7, 2017, Defendant B borrowed a total of KRW 170 million between the Plaintiff and the Defendants, and Defendant C guaranteed this, and the maturity date was September 30, 2018, and the interest rate was 1% per month.
The above certificate of borrowing includes that the certificate of borrowing must be null and void.
[Grounds for recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (i.e., the Plaintiff’s assertion) loaned KRW 170 million to Defendant B on September 30, 2018 by setting the due date for reimbursement of KRW 170 million, and the Defendant C, the spouse of Defendant B, guaranteed this.
However, Defendant B did not pay the above KRW 170 million, and the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from July 2015 to the date of full payment.
It is appropriate for the plaintiff to prepare the loan certificate presented by the plaintiff as evidence, but the plaintiff written the amount including future interest at the time of lending to the defendants, and the defendants did not borrow the money as claimed by the plaintiff.
B. In a case where the authenticity of a judgment document is recognized, the existence of a legal act that forms the content should be recognized unless there are special circumstances as acceptable, even if the existence and content of the declaration of intent indicated in the document are clear and acceptable.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da30839, Sept. 8, 2006). The Defendants acknowledged that the loan certificate was made on two occasions as acknowledged earlier. According to the loan certificate No. 1 and the loan certificate No. 3, Defendant C borrowed KRW 170 million from the Plaintiff around December 9, 2012, and Defendant B borrowed this amount.