(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2016.03.17 2015가단16909

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) 대전지방법원천안지원 2016.03.17 2015가단16909

청구이의

Text

1. The Defendant’s order of payment for loans in Daejeon District Court Branch 2014Hu6612 against the Plaintiff is authentic.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant loaned KRW 65,260,00 to C by the Defendant as the Daejeon District Court Branch Branch Branch No. 2014Da6612, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan obligation against C, and that the Plaintiff applied for a payment order seeking payment of KRW 65,260,000 for the above loan loan and delayed damages therefor, and received the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) from the said court on December 24, 2014.

B. On December 26, 2014, the Plaintiff served the original copy of the instant payment order, and the said payment order was finalized on January 10, 2015, as the Plaintiff did not raise an objection.

C. In filing an application for the instant payment order, the Defendant submitted the loan certificate (hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) along with the loan certificate, and the Plaintiff’s name is indicated in the joint and several surety column of the loan certificate of this case and indicated “A” as follows.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence No. 1, and the purport of whole pleading

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff prepared the loan certificate of this case and had not jointly and severally guaranteed the debt of the loan to the defendant, and C entered the name of the plaintiff in the joint and several surety column of the loan certificate of this case without the plaintiff's consent.

Therefore, since the part of the Plaintiff’s joint and several sureties in the loan certificate of this case is invalid, compulsory execution based on the payment order of this case should not be permitted.

B. The plaintiff asserted that he consented to the joint and several sureties's name on his behalf with respect to the above loan debt. As such, the plaintiff's joint and several sureties's name in the loan certificate of this case was duly formed according to the plaintiff's intent, and the plaintiff bears the joint and several sureties's obligation based on the loan certificate of this case.

3. Determination

(a) In case of a finalized payment order, the payment order shall be issued;

유사 판례

-대구지방법원경주지원 2019.10.23 2019가단11411

-대전지방법원천안지원 2016.11.30 2016가단108126

-서울동부지방법원 2020.02.13 2019가단8871

-대구지방법원서부지원 2017.11.16 2017가단9668