logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.16 2018나30022
양수금
Text

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Defendant’s KRW 84,288,309 and KRW 16,900,106 among the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s KRW 17 April 17, 2017.

Reasons

1. Financial institution lending basic facts: C Co., Ltd., and F primary debtor: D joint and several sureties: The amount agreed on April 30, 2003; the agreed amount; interest rate on delay delay; 22,234,92 won; 25% on May 17, 2006; the remaining debt amount as of May 17, 2006: the principal amount; 19,49,823 won; accrued interest; 15,30,014 won; total 34,829,837 won;

A. Upon receipt of the claim for the following loans from C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the claim for the loan of this case”), the Plaintiff filed an application with the Seoul Central District Court for payment order against D and the Defendant and E, a joint guarantor, as the principal debtor of the loan of this case. The payment order of the above court was served on the Defendant on August 24, 2006 and confirmed as to the Defendant on September 8, 2006 (hereinafter “the payment order of this case”). The payment order of this case finalized as to the Defendant on September 8, 2006 (hereinafter “the payment order of this case”). The above payment order of this case was jointly and severally and severally with D and jointly paid to the Plaintiff KRW 34,830,340,50,123 at the rate of 25% per annum from May 18, 2006 to the day of complete payment.”

B. In the case of the above application for the payment order, the plaintiff filed an application for not being served on E, who is a joint and several surety different from the principal debtor D, and upon the plaintiff's application for the lawsuit, it was referred to the litigation procedure under Seoul Central District Court 2006Da481268. The above court rendered a favorable judgment on June 5, 2007, and the above judgment was finalized on June 27, 2007 as to D, which is the principal debtor.

(hereinafter “instant judgment”). C.

On April 27, 2017, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant, a joint guarantor of the instant loan claim, for the interruption of extinctive prescription, on the ground that ten-year extinctive prescription period of the claim established upon the instant payment order was imminent.

The claim for the instant loan remains 16,90,106 won with principal as of April 16, 2017, and 67,388,203 won with interest on delay and delay delay damages, and 84,28,309 won with total.

[Grounds for recognition] Each entry of Gap 1 and 2 (including paper numbers) and all pleadings.

arrow