The statement of the details of receipt of principal and interest made by the creditor in the petition for correction of the complaint and the order of appropriation for repayment

In this case where there is no assertion or proof that the obligor exercised the right to designate appropriation, if the Plaintiff’s legal representative, who is the obligee, stated in the application for correction of the complaint that he received the principal and interest as stated therein, there is an assertion of the obligee’s satisfaction of appropriation. Therefore, if the designation appropriation is not recognized, the obligee’s satisfaction of appropriation should be made in accordance

Articles 476 and 477 of the Civil Act

Attorney Park Jong-chul, Counsel for the defendant-appellant in charge of Young-gun-gun

Defendant 1 and one other Defendants, Defendant 1 et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant-appellee

Daegu High Court Decision 82Na1594 delivered on June 15, 1983

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the first ground for appeal:

The judgment of the court below, based on the evidence of this time, recognizes that the transaction limit entered into between the non-party 1 and the plaintiff's association in mediating the fishery products is 16,053,776 won including 14,00,000 won for the performance guarantee insurance policy and 16,053,776 won for the total of 14,00,000 won for the performance guarantee insurance policy and 16,053,776 won for the above non-party's above transaction limit and its overdue interest, the defendants jointly and severally guaranteed the above non-party's obligation to sell fishery products to the plaintiff's association within the scope of the above transaction limit and its overdue interest. In light of the records, the above measures of the court below are acceptable, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or violation of the reasoning

2. On the second ground for appeal:

If a debtor bears several obligations for the same kind of obligation to the same creditor, and the obligor is unable to repay all of his obligations at that time, the obligee may apply for the payment of such obligation. If the obligor does not designate the above, the obligee may apply for the payment of the obligation at that time. If the obligee does not designate the obligation, the obligee may apply for the payment of the obligation at that time, and as such, Nonparty 1, the obligor, who is the obligor, may exercise the right to designate appropriation in this case, and if there is no assertion or proof that the obligee exercised the right to designate appropriation, the obligee’s right to designate appropriation can be exercised at the Plaintiff Association. According to the records, the obligee’s legal reasoning was 8,979,944 won on December 2, 1981; 620,056 won for the payment of the principal and interest at that time; 620,000 won for the payment of the principal and interest at that time; 630,000 won for the payment of the principal and interest at that time, 196.2,015 won

Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)