beta
Text
1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.
2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.
3...
Reasons
1. The facts are as follows: (a) on October 31, 2008, the Defendant and C issued to the Plaintiff a promissory note amounting to KRW 3.6 million at a face value and at a sight at the due date (hereinafter “instant promissory note”); (b) on March 4, 2009, the Defendant and C drafted and made a promissory note No. 1983 (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) with a content that recognizes compulsory execution based on the instant promissory note to the Plaintiff on March 4, 2009, the fact that: (c) the Defendant and C drafted and made a promissory note No. 1983 (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) with a content that recognizes compulsory execution on the basis of the instant promissory
2. The assertion and judgment
A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) lent KRW 3.6 million to C on October 31, 2008. At the time, the Defendant agreed to repay the debt jointly with C, and the Defendant issued and delivered the Promissory Notes jointly with C to the Plaintiff in order to repay the debt and secure the underlying claim. Therefore, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 3.6 million to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant did not enter into a civil guarantee agreement with C in addition to the issuance of the Promissory Notes, and the Defendant did not lend the Plaintiff KRW 3.6 million to C even if it is acknowledged that the Defendant entered into a guarantee contract under the civil law, and the Plaintiff did not have any claim for the loan to C or the Defendant prior to the instant lawsuit. Therefore, the damages for delay of the loan should not be calculated from October 31, 2008.
B. We examine whether the Defendant may be deemed to have guaranteed the Plaintiff’s above loan obligations.
Even if a promissory note was issued or endorsed on a promissory note to secure a specific person’s obligation, it cannot be inferred that a civil guarantee agreement has been concluded between the issuer or endorser of the promissory note and the obligee, and the obligee may not be deemed as the cause of the issuance or endorsement of the promissory note.