Where a person jointly and severally guaranteed another person's obligation under the installment sale guarantee insurance contract jointly with the former by using a seal imprint certificate delivered for the disposal of real estate from the former wife, the case reversing the original judgment which denied the liability of expression representation of the former wife.

The case reversing the judgment of the court below which denied the responsibility of expression agency of the former wife for reasons of insufficient deliberation, in case where the seal imprint certificate and the purpose of use received after being granted the power of representation on disposal of the real estate from the former wife are stated as joint guarantee of guarantee insurance, and the representative letter for application for the issuance of a certificate of seal imprint was submitted to the former applicant for a certificate of personal seal impression and the joint and several guarantee was made

Article 126 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 90Da16009 delivered on April 23, 1991 (Gong1991, 1459) Supreme Court Decision 92Da31781 delivered on October 13, 1992 (Gong1992, 3139) Supreme Court Decision 97Da9895 delivered on July 8, 1997 (Gong197Ha, 2455)

Korea Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. (Attorney Choi Byung-jin, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Defendant

Busan District Court Decision 97Na7223 delivered on February 19, 1998

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan District Court Panel Division.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, on November 4, 1995, the court below held that, upon the request of the defendant's co-defendant 1 to obtain the above certificate of the personal seal impression from the non-party Hyundai Motor Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "non-party Co-Defendant 1"), the non-party Co-Defendant 1 was unable to obtain the above certificate of the personal seal impression from the non-party Hyundai Motor Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "non-party Co-Defendant Co-Defendant 1") for the purpose of securing the liability for installment payment amounting to KRW 25,850,00 among the plaintiff and the non-party Co-Defendant 1's co-Defendant 1's co-defendant 1's joint and several surety's personal seal impression certificate, the non-party Co-Defendant 1's co-Defendant 1's co-Defendant 1's co-Defendant 1's co-defendant 1's joint and several surety's co-defendant 1's co-Defendant 1's co-Defendant 1's co-Defendant's joint surety.

However, according to the court below's duly admitted, the defendant granted the above non-party the right of representation on disposal of real estate registered in the name of the defendant beyond the scope of ordinary family life while living together with the above non-party for a long time. The non-party's joint and several liability act is not merely represented by the defendant's joint and several liability act, but it is hard to see that the above non-party's joint and several liability act is a joint and several liability joint and several liability act, and the non-party's right of representation on the part of the non-party is not objectively 97, and the court below's decision that the non-party's right of representation on the part of the non-party is not objectively 97,971, and there is no reason to believe that the non-party's right of representation on the part of the non-party's joint and several liability for the above defendant's joint and several liability act was not established in light of the legal principles as to the non-party's right of representation on the part of the non-party.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Yong-hun (Presiding Justice)