(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.01.14 2015나15082

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.01.14 2015나15082

양수금

Text

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. C, at the time of September 24, 2001, lent KRW 4,00,000 to D, who was the Defendant’s spouse, at the rate of 5% per month interest, and due date of reimbursement on September 24, 2002 (hereinafter “instant loan”). D, who prepared and executed a certificate of borrowing the above loan obligation to the Plaintiff, was signed and sealed by the Defendant as the joint and several surety for the instant loan obligation.

B. D submitted the defendant's power of delegation to D on September 24, 2001, stating the contents of delegation of the certificate of the personal seal impression to D and received the defendant's certificate of the personal seal impression in the name of the defendant.

C. C prepared and delivered a power of attorney (a delegating D and the defendant) entrusting the preparation of a notarial deed to the effect that it would not immediately object to compulsory execution when refusing to pay the amount of the bill. The power of attorney is accompanied by a certificate of personal seal impression in the name of the defendant issued by D.

In addition, C was issued on September 24, 2001 by the issuer D and the Defendant, and a promissory note with a face value of KRW 00,000.

C on November 10, 2011, the Plaintiff transferred claims, including the instant loan claims, to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff, who was delegated by C with the power to notify the transfer of the instant claims, sent a letter verifying the fact that the said claims were transferred to the Plaintiff, and the said mail reached the Defendant on December 23, 201.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings.

2. Judgment on the parties’ assertion

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant has a duty to repay the debt of this case as a joint and several surety.

In this regard, the defendant did not have any joint and several guarantee for the above loan debt, and the loan certificate and promissory note bearing the defendant's signature and seal are proved to have been forged by D, which was the defendant's husband.

(b)the person whose judgment is indicated in the note as the obligor;

유사 판례

-청주지방법원영동지원 2015.08.21 2015가단3807

-부산지방법원 2020.01.09 2019나101

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.04.07 2015나48558

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.06.24 2019나64992