beta
Text
1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.
2. The defendant shall be jointly and severally with the plaintiff 244,380,327 won and the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 6, 2005, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 140,000,00 to co-defendant B of the first instance trial on October 31, 2005.
B. Around October 23, 2006, B prepared and issued to the Plaintiff a written confirmation that “The interest rate of April 2006 to December 30, 2006 is KRW 56,00,000,000, and the said amount shall be repaid by January 10, 2007,” which read that “The interest rate of April 2006 to December 30, 2006 is 56,000 won.”
C. Around July 7, 2006, the Defendant, a representative director of the non-party F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), who was employed by the Defendant, as the partner of the non-party F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), prepared a letter of guarantee to the effect that “B will preferentially repay KRW 140,000,000,000 borrowed from the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff at the service cost received by F in connection with the subsequent reconstruction project,” and written his personal information, and then delivered the Plaintiff with
B On December 26, 2007, the Plaintiff newly prepared and delivered to the Plaintiff a cash custody certificate stating that “270,000,000 won shall be repaid until December 23, 2008 and, if the payment is not made within the said period, interest at the rate of 4% per month shall be paid” (hereinafter “the cash custody certificate of this case”). This was signed and sealed by the Defendant as a joint guarantor, along with the Defendant’s personal information.
E. On January 11, 2008, a notary public made a notarial deed under a monetary loan agreement (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) with the content that “the plaintiff shall pay 270,000,000 won to B on December 26, 2007 and shall be 30% interest per annum until December 23, 2008, and the defendant shall guarantee B’s debt, and if B and the defendant fail to perform their debt immediately, they shall be aware that there is no objection even if they are subject to compulsory execution.”
[Ground of recognition] The defendant's assertion that the facts without dispute, Gap's 1, 2, 3, and 4 seals were stolen is followed.