beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. The total cost of litigation incurred until October 18, 2017.
Reasons
On April 23, 1997, the Peace Bank lent KRW 10,000,00 to C, and the defendant and B jointly and severally guaranteed the debt, the Peace Bank Co., Ltd. on December 31, 2001, and the Korean Finance System Specialized Credit Guarantee Co., Ltd. on February 14, 2003, and the fact that the Korean Finance System Specialized Credit Guarantee Co., Ltd. transferred C’s above principal and interest on the loan to the Promotion Mutual Savings Bank Co., Ltd. on February 14, 2003 is not disputed between the parties.
The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff received C’s claim for the principal and interest of the loan from the Promotion Mutual Savings Bank on June 15, 2011 as the cause of the instant claim, and that the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the principal and interest of KRW 12,938,789, which is the balance of the principal and interest of the loan, and delay damages for KRW 1,363,549.
In light of the above legal principles, the defendant's assertion that the defendant paid part of the loans to the promotion mutual savings bank and was exempted from the remaining debts from the promotion mutual savings bank. Thus, in full view of the fact-finding results on the Korean credit information company's claims from February 2003 to March 31, 2014, the promotion mutual savings bank's delegation of the power to collect claims to the Korean credit information company from February 23, 2003, and the defendant paid 4,50,000 won out of 18,829,034 won to June 23, 2003 and exempted the remainder of 14,329,034 won from the Korean credit information company. Thus, the defendant's defense is justified, and the plaintiff's claim is not required further to determine the facts.
Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit.
Unlike this conclusion, the judgment of the first instance, which accepted the Plaintiff’s claim, was eventually unjust as the Defendant submitted new arguments and evidence for the first time in the trial, and thus, it was revoked.