beta
Text
1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 169,80,000 as well as 20% per annum from August 29, 2013 to the date of full payment.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the claim against Defendant B: ① on August 10, 2012, the notary public borrowed KRW 889,000,000 from the Plaintiff, KRW 120,200,000 from the Plaintiff, and KRW 10,000,000,000 from the Plaintiff on August 31, 2012; and
9. The fact that each notarial deed was prepared and delivered on November 15, 2012, 200,000 won, 25 million won on October 20 of the same year, 18.30,02 million won on November 18 of the same month, and 25 million won on July 27, 2012, and that each of the above notarial deeds was prepared and delivered on August 17, 2012, borrowed KRW 49,60,000 from the Plaintiff under No. 912 on August 17, 2012, and borrowed KRW 1,00,000 on November 15, 2012, and KRW 3,96 million on December 20 of the same year, or that there is no dispute between the parties concerned, or that each of the notarial deeds was prepared and delivered on December 20, 2012, by adding the purport of the entire pleadings as described in subparagraph 2-1 and 2.
Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 169,80,000 (i.e., KRW 1220,200,000 won; hereinafter “the loan of this case”) and damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from August 29, 2013 to the date of delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case as requested by the Plaintiff after each due date.
2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C
A. The facts of recognition 1) Defendant C owned from April 27, 2010 to D 1,323 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) prior to Sinju-si. Defendant C completed the registration of transfer of ownership as described in paragraph (2) of the Disposition on July 11, 201 with respect to the said land on the ground of sale on the 1st day of the same month.
[Ground of recognition] Evidence No. 3-3, Evidence No. 5-1, and 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings
B. The registration of transfer of ownership under Defendant C’s name as to the land of this case as to the Plaintiff’s assertion 1 by the party concerned is null and void according to the title trust agreement between Defendant B and
Accordingly, Defendant B is against Defendant C.