beta
Text
1. There is no guarantee obligation of KRW 66,706,565 based on a joint and several guarantee contract (main debtor B) for the defendant.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On November 12, 1997, B entered into a loan transaction agreement (hereinafter “instant loan”) with the Saemaeul Fund in Chuncheon as of November 12, 1997, setting the credit limit amount of KRW 20,000,000, credit and credit for the type of loan, the agreed period from November 12, 1997 to November 12, 200, and the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan obligations in B on the same day.
(hereinafter referred to as the “joint and several sureties of this case”). (b)
On October 18, 2007, the Saemaul Depository of Chuncheon transferred the instant loan and joint and several liability claims to the Federation of the Saemaul Savings Depository. On August 7, 2015, the Saemaul Savings Depository transferred the said claims to the Defendant, and the Defendant, representing the Saemaul Savings Depository and the Federation of Chuncheon, notified the Plaintiff of the said assignment of claims.
C. Around February 2016, the Defendant urged the Plaintiff to repay the debt amounting to KRW 66,706,565 based on the joint and several surety in this case.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant's claim based on the joint and several guarantee of this case has expired due to the expiration of the extinctive prescription. Thus, the contract term expiration date of the loan of this case is November 12, 2000 as seen earlier. Thus, the defendant's claim based on the joint and several guarantee of this case has expired due to the expiration of the extinctive prescription on November 12, 2010 after the lapse of 10 years from the date, barring any special circumstances.
In regard to this, the Defendant asserts that the extinctive prescription was interrupted on January 12, 2010, which is the date when the exemption was granted, and that the interruption of prescription extends to the Plaintiff, the guarantor, as well as the Plaintiff, as the guarantor, after having filed an application for bankruptcy and exemption, including the claim for the loan of this case in the list of creditors as of May 13, 2009, Chuncheon District Court 2009Hadan1208, 2009Da1209, 2009.
The written evidence Nos. 4 and 6 shall only apply for B's bankruptcy exemption.