beta
Text
1. The Defendants are jointly and severally and severally liable to the Plaintiff for KRW 288,503,240 and KRW 135,324,744, respectively, until April 9, 2015.
Reasons
1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the respective entries and arguments of Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 11-1, 2, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 9, 10-1, 1, 2, 4, 4, 5, 10-1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 4, 5, 10-1, 5:
In order to purchase the instant loan and joint and several liability agreement, F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “F”) has been loaned KRW 500,00,000 from the Plaintiff on July 15, 201 to June 4, 2011, the interest rate of KRW 3.25% per annum until June 4, 201, and the delay rate of KRW 17,3 months but less than six months and less than 19% per annum per annum (the delay rate was changed to 17% per annum from January 2, 2012 to 17% per annum from January 2, 2012, and the date of closing the argument of this case was changed to 15% per annum from the date of closing the argument of this case (hereinafter referred to as “the instant loan”), and the maximum debt amount of the instant real estate was 600,500,000 per annum and the maximum debt amount per annum.
Defendant B, a representative director of F, entered into a joint and several guarantee agreement of KRW 600,000,000 for the above loan obligation to the Plaintiff on the same day.
(The above agreement is written as a "full-time guarantee," but its nature appears to be a joint and several guarantee agreement as follows). (B)
Defendant A and F are merged. 1) Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A”).
(2) On September 15, 2010, Defendant B entered into a merger contract with F, and merged F on November 19, 2010. (2) On May 2, 2011, Defendant B appears to be an internal procedure of the Plaintiff on May 2, 201, rather than an approval of the corporate legal meaning of the said merger, on the premise of replacement of joint and several guarantors.
In addition, although the replacement of the joint and several sureties was required, the plaintiff rejected the replacement for the reason that the defendant A is a hostile company for three consecutive years.
C. The repayment date of the instant loan shall be extended.