(영문) 대구지방법원서부지원 2019.10.17 2018가합52703

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원서부지원 2019.10.17 2018가합52703

청구이의

Text

1. A notary public of the Defendant against the Plaintiff is a notarial deed No. 203 written by C Law Firm on April 9, 2015.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On April 2015, D around April 2015 related to the parties, the representative director of E and F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “stock company”) and the Plaintiff, as the wife of D, held office as E and F’s auditors.

B. On April 9, 2015, the Defendant prepared a notarial deed (No. 203, 2015, hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) with the content that E would repay the Defendant’s investment obligation of KRW 900 million to the Defendant by March 30, 2016. The instant notarial deed is indicated as F, D, Plaintiff, and H as joint and several sureties, and in the case of the remaining joint and several sureties except H, G affixed their respective seals on behalf of the said joint and several sureties.

On the other hand, at the time of the preparation of the Notarial Deed, E, F, D, Plaintiff as a delegating person, and G as mandatory (hereinafter referred to as “the power of attorney in this case”). The letter of attorney in this case was written in G, and both the delegating person’s seal impression affixed G.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 and 3 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), witness G testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. 1) The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff has not jointly and severally guaranteed the debt based on the notarial deed in this case against the defendant, and that the notarial deed in this case is null and void since G which does not have the right to represent the plaintiff voluntarily affixed the plaintiff's seal in accordance with D's instructions, and thus its execution should be excluded. 2) The defendant asserts that the plaintiff is in the position to jointly and severally guarantee the defendant's debt to the defendant as the head of D who is the representative director of E and the director of the above company, and that the notary public who prepared the notarial deed in this case is in the position to jointly and severally guarantee the defendant's debt to the defendant as the director of the above company. The notarial deed in this case

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.17 2016가합510056

-수원지방법원안산지원 2016.10.11 2016가단61740 (1)

-서울북부지방법원 2019.06.27 2017가합2124

-대구지방법원 2019.04.25 2017가단125327

-부산지방법원 2010.4.2.선고 2008가단167922 판결