beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 66,57,860 for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from January 1, 2014 to June 16, 2014.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff: (a) supplied Marin as of the end of each month with the Defendant’s representative director B; (b) entered into a continuous commodity supply contract with the content that the Defendant would receive the payment on the last day of the following month; and (c) supplied 157,736,040 won from August 31, 2013 to November 30, 2013.
B. B Co., Ltd. paid to the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 91,158,180 by February 28, 2014.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, and 2
2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the above goods payment obligation of the corporation B, and the defendant merely signed the repayment contract as the representative director and did not indicate the intent of the joint and several sureties.
3. In full view of the purport of the entire arguments in the records of evidence Nos. 3, 4, and 5, the defendant may, at the request of the plaintiff on April 7, 2014, recognize the fact that the defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the amount of KRW 66,57,860, which is the balance at the time out of the debt owed to the plaintiff of the defendant B, and there is no counter-proof.
In particular, the evidence No. 4 explicitly states that “A shall be paid by the payer jointly and severally liable and by the date specified below,” and it is recognized that the Defendant written his name and resident registration number in the column of the payer and signed.
In addition, after the deposit plan column "4. 66,57,860" was expired, the number of units is recognized as true, but it was cut back to discover the phrases of the joint and several sureties late and withdraw the intention of the joint and several sureties, as alleged by the defendant.
It is difficult to see “the date of repayment” as the Plaintiff’s assertion.
4. 30. Pledge, but it was impossible to repay until that time.
It is only understood as "...."
Therefore, the defendant is a joint guarantor.