beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The fact that, under the name of the Defendants, a promissory note No. 45,00,00 won at par value on February 7, 2007, issuance date, February 7, 2007, and one promissory note No. 1 is issued at sight of the Plaintiff and the date of payment, and on the same day, the fact that, “Defendant B, the obligor, and the issuer (trustee), Defendant C, the obligee, and the issuer (trustee), the client and the commissioned agent are the persons issuing and signing the said promissory note, and if the payment of the said note is delayed, there is no objection even if they are subject to compulsory execution,” the fact that a promissory deed No. 217, 2007, and hereinafter referred to as “notarial deed of this case”) is written does not conflict between the parties, or can be recognized by the statement under subparagraph 1.
2. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was prepared upon Defendant C’s request for the loan, and then lent KRW 45,00,000 to the Defendants who are the married couple. As such, the Defendants are liable to pay the above loan and damages for delay.
B. Defendant B’s assertion 1) was in existence with Defendant C at the time of the preparation of the instant notarial deed. Defendant C was carrying the seals of Defendant B on Defendant B’s promissory note and the instant notarial deed, and thus, Defendant C was not liable for the completion of the extinctive prescription, and Defendant C took the Plaintiff, a corporate bond manager, from Gambling’s loan of KRW 40,000,000, which deducts KRW 2,000,000 from KRW 38,000,000. The Defendant C was obtained by defrauding the entire money from the Plaintiff as an illegal gambling, and was not obligated to repay as a loan of money, and the extinctive prescription has expired.
3. First of all, we examine the Defendants’ claims on the expiration of the extinctive prescription period. Even if the instant loan claims against the Defendants are acknowledged, as alleged by the Plaintiff, the period of payment has not been fixed.