beta
Text
1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
1.
Reasons
1. In full view of the overall purport of pleadings as to the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim, the Plaintiff paid KRW 50 million to Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) on January 2, 2012, taking into account the overall purport of arguments as to the Plaintiff’s evidence Nos. 1-1 through 3 and 2-1 through 3, the Defendant Co., Ltd.: (a) around that time, prepare a loan certificate stating that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 50 million from the Plaintiff on January 2, 2012; (b) affix a monthly interest rate of KRW 20 million; and (c) affix a corporate seal impression on January 1, 2013; and (d) deliver it to the Plaintiff by attaching a corporate seal imprint certificate; (c) the above loan certificate stating that Defendant B, the representative director of the Defendant Co., Ltd., bears a joint and several surety obligation of the Defendant Co., Ltd.; and (d) Defendant Co., Ltd.’s payment of KRW 105 million to the Plaintiff.
In a case where the authenticity of a disposal document is recognized, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the expression of intent in accordance with the language and text stated in the disposal document unless there is any clear and acceptable reflective evidence that denies the contents of the statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2004Da60065, May 27, 2005; 2006Da27055, Sept. 14, 2006). Based on such legal principles, in full view of the contents and methods of the loan certificate recognized above, and the receipt and payment of interest, the defendant company borrowed KRW 50 million from the plaintiff on January 2, 2012 at the interest rate of 2% per month, and at the time, it can be recognized that the defendant company jointly and severally guaranteed the debt owed to the plaintiff by the defendant company against the plaintiff.
[In contrast to the above loan certificates, the Defendant argued that the Plaintiff invested KRW 50 million in the Defendant Company. However, the Defendant’s testimony of the witness C with each of the descriptions and number 1 to 8, and 10 (the number 2 to 30 million is included in each number) as seen earlier.