beta
Text
1. The defendant's order for payment against the plaintiff was requested by the Changwon District Court 2007Da197, Changwon District Court 2007Da197.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The defendant asserted that "the non-party C as a joint guarantor and lent interest rate of KRW 60 million to the plaintiff on September 24, 2004, KRW 3% on September 24, 2005, and the due date of payment on September 24, 2005 (to be provided with land and buildings owned by the plaintiff as security), except for the payment of KRW 31,906,857 from C and the plaintiff on November 1, 2006 (the payment of KRW 31,906,857 as dividends upon request for an auction of real estate) was not paid." The defendant claimed that "the payment order between the plaintiff and the defendant was jointly and severally paid the payment order of KRW 57,313,143, and damages for delay calculated on November 1, 2006 (hereinafter "the payment order of the plaintiff and the defendant on April 24, 2007") by the Changwon District Court Branch Branch Court of Korea."
B. The defendant asserted that "the plaintiff is a joint and several surety and lent 20 million won interest rate of 1.5% per month on February 28, 2005 and on February 28, 2006, with the maturity of 1.5% on the interest rate of 20 million won." The plaintiff and C applied for a payment order against the plaintiff and C to the court of Changwon District Court, Changwon District Court for the payment order on April 24, 2007 and received the payment order on April 24, 2007, "the plaintiff and C jointly and severally shall pay 20 million won to the defendant and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 18% per annum from May 25, 2005 to the date of full payment (hereinafter "the payment order of this case 2"). The above payment order also became final and conclusive on May 10, 207.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The plaintiff's gist of the plaintiff's assertion did not provide joint and several sureties with a joint and several sureties's debt owed to the defendant, and even if there was a domestic fact, the plaintiff fully repaid all the debt indicated in each payment order.