beta
Text
1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 47,00,000 as well as the interest rate from March 20, 2001 to the day of full payment.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On February 19, 2001, the Plaintiff loaned 47,000,000 won to Defendant B on December 30, 2001, with interest set at 36% per annum, respectively, and Defendant C guaranteed the above loan obligations of Defendant B.
B. In around 2009, the Plaintiff filed an application for the payment order against the Defendants for the payment of the above loan (this Court Decision 2009Guj85). On March 30, 2009, this Court rendered a payment order stating that “The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 47,00,000 and the amount calculated at the rate of 36% per annum from March 20, 2001 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “advance payment order”). The above payment order became final and conclusive on April 17, 2009.
C. On June 18, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an application for the instant payment order for the extension of the prescription period for a claim under the preceding payment order. On July 2, 2018, the Defendants submitted a written objection against this, the said payment order procedure was implemented as the instant litigation procedure.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the claim
A. According to the above facts as to the cause of the claim, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 47,000,000 according to the preceding payment order and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 36% per annum from March 20, 2001 to the date of full payment, unless there are special circumstances.
B. As to the Defendants’ assertion, the Defendants asserted that the Defendants repaid the Plaintiff’s loan obligations, and even if not, they were exempted from liability due to the Defendants’ bankruptcy.
However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the above assertion, and thus, the defendants' above assertion cannot be accepted.
3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the plaintiff's claim is reasonable.