logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2015.02.13 2014가단43346
면책확인
Text

1. The Seoul Eastern District Court 2010Kaso546909 decision on the Defendant’s recommendation for the Defendant’s guarantee debt.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 20, 2002, the Defendant granted a loan of KRW 10,130,00 to Nonparty B by setting the lending period of KRW 9 months, interest rate of KRW 18%, delayed interest rate of KRW 29%. On May 26, 2003, the Defendant entered into a repayment contract with Nonparty B by setting the lending period of KRW 36 months, interest rate of KRW 21% per annum, KRW 6,725,316, and repayment method of KRW 6,725,316 as equal repayment of principal and interest.

(2) At the time, the Plaintiff, who was a member of B at the time, jointly and severally guaranteed the Defendant’s obligation of the instant loan.

(hereinafter referred to as the “joint and several sureties of this case”).

On June 10, 2005, the Plaintiff filed an application for bankruptcy and immunity with the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2005Hadan5395, 2005 Da7595, and was granted immunity from the above court on December 29, 2005 (hereinafter “instant immunity”). The instant immunity became final and conclusive on January 19, 2006, and the list of creditors submitted by the Plaintiff was omitted from the Defendant’s claim.

C. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff as Seoul Eastern District Court 2010 Ghana546909, and on March 25, 2010, the said court rendered a decision on performance recommendation (hereinafter “the instant decision on performance recommendation”) stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant KRW 6,843,007 and any delay damages for KRW 6,604,189 among them,” and the said decision was served on the Plaintiff on March 29, 2010, and became final and conclusive on April 13, 2010.

[Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1-4 evidence, Eul 1-7 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of claim, the defendant's above claim against the plaintiff constitutes a bankruptcy claim as a property claim arising from the cause before bankruptcy is declared. The decision of immunity of this case becomes final and conclusive, and the plaintiff's responsibility is determined pursuant to the main sentence of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act

arrow