beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff’s credit loan agreement against Defendant B Co., Ltd. on July 13, 2018 does not exist.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On July 3, 2018, the Plaintiff’s Liman F entered into an agreement with the Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) to lend KRW 18 million in the name of the Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant B”) by using influencing flucing fluor in the paper of the credit loan agreement brought by the employees B before the G apartment of Gwangju, stating that “F” in the column for the loan application amount, “60” in the column for the loan period, and “A (Plaintiff)” in the column for the applicant column, and then arbitrarily signing the agreement on the signature of the applicant column, and delivering one copy of the forged credit loan agreement as if the document was duly formed. The Defendant B transferred the above money to the deposit account opened in the name of the Plaintiff.
B. In addition, around September 10, 2018, the Plaintiff’s words “Defendant E” applied for a loan to Defendant E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant E”) under the Plaintiff’s name and the Plaintiff’s non-face loan of KRW 40 million between Defendant E and Defendant E. (hereinafter “Defendant E”).
The agreement was concluded, and Defendant E remitted the money to the deposit account opened in the name of the Plaintiff. Meanwhile, the F was prosecuted for forging and uttering private documents including each of the instant loans, and for copying and uttering of private electromagnetic records, etc., and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years and for 3 years of suspension of execution on February 19, 2020. [In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, Party A’s evidence Nos. 1 through 8, and E’s evidence No. 5], and the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole.
2. According to the facts acknowledged prior to the determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B, it is recognized that F forged a credit loan agreement without the Plaintiff’s consent and received a loan from Defendant B, and there is no evidence that the said loan agreement was concluded with the Plaintiff’s consent, and thus, the instant loan agreement is null and void as prescribed in the above Article.
In this regard, Defendant B shall be suspended from paying a loan to Defendant B.