logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2013.10.04 2013가단5091705
보증채무금
Text

1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.

2. The Defendant’s KRW 2,492,008 and its relation to the Plaintiff on August 21, 2012.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 21, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a loan transaction agreement with B, setting the loan principal of KRW 5 million up to August 20, 2017 as the rate of 39% per annum until August 20, 2017.

B. The Defendant’s joint and several sureties contract was drafted on August 21, 2012 under the name of the Defendant that the Defendant jointly and severally and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s obligation to the Plaintiff within the limit of KRW 6.95 million.

C. On August 21, 2012, the Plaintiff confirmed personal information by telephone to the Defendant, explained the terms and conditions of the loan, details of the joint and several sureties, etc., and asked the Defendant whether he/she has written his/her own signature as a joint and several sureties in the above joint and several sureties contract, and the Defendant respondeded

After that, the plaintiff paid 5 million won to B, and B has not repaid 4,984,017 won of the loan principal and interest and damages for delay as of July 30, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2, 4, and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The Plaintiff asserted the parties, at the time of entering into the joint and several sureties contract (hereinafter “instant joint and several sureties contract”) on August 21, 2012, the Defendant confirmed the intent of joint and several sureties by telephone, and confirmed the intent of joint and several sureties by the Defendant. Since the Defendant’s signature was submitted, the instant joint and several sureties contract was asserted to be valid and sought payment of the amount of the joint and several sureties obligation based on the joint and several sureties contract on August 21, 2012 against the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant did not have signed the Defendant’s signature on the column of the joint and several sureties contract, and thus, the instant joint and several sureties contract

B. The Special Act on the Protection of Surety, Article 3 (1) of the Act provides that "a guarantee shall take effect when the doctor shall indicate in writing his name and seal or signature of the guarantor," and each of subparagraphs A through 8 of Article 3 of the Special Act on the Protection of Surety.

arrow