beta
Text
1. The decision on the loan case against the defendant against the defendant is rendered by the Gangseo-gu District Court of Chuncheon on September 12, 1997.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On September 12, 1997, the Saemaul Savings Depository in the Korean won filed a lawsuit against the principal debtor B, C, and the Plaintiff, a joint guarantor, for the loan claim amounting to KRW 15 million, and 22% interest per annum from February 2, 1996 to the date of repayment. The above judgment became final and conclusive on October 11, 1997.
B. The Korea Forest Asset Management Loan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D Forest Asset Management Loan”) acquired the instant claim for the judgment from the Korea Forest Community Depository, the Korea Forest Corporation, and the Defendant acquired the said claim from D Forest Asset Management Loan.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, since the defendant's claim based on the judgment of this case against the plaintiff of this case against the plaintiff of this case was completed on September 12, 1997 after 10 years from September 12, 2007, which was the date on which the above judgment became final and conclusive, the extinctive prescription has expired on September 12, 2007.
3. Judgment on the defendant's defense
A. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion 1) Dlim asset management loan, the former creditor of the Defendant, filed an application with the Daejeon District Court for a payment order against the Plaintiff to seek payment of the instant judgment bond that was transferred from the Korea won-U.S. Saemaul Depository to Daejeon District Court 2013 B, C, and the Plaintiff on December 23, 2013, and the payment order was issued on December 26, 2013 and served on the principal debtor B on January 3, 2014 but the above payment order became final and conclusive on January 18, 2014 because B did not raise any objection thereto, the statute of limitations against the Plaintiff, the guaranteed debt, was suspended. Meanwhile, Dlim asset management loan was not served on the Plaintiff in the above payment order case, and the Daejeon District Court 2014Da320125 decided January 25, 2014.