beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff on October 29, 2012, No. 642, and December 2012, 2012.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Defendant, as a fraternity, organized the sequences from October 26, 2012 to October 26, 2014, 50,000 won in the fraternity, 25,000 won in the number of accounts, 25,000 won in the month of the deposit amount (2,50,000 won in the month after the receipt of the fraternity), as a fraternity. D subscribed as a fraternity Nos. 1, 3,7, 16, and 17 in the number of accounts.
B. D received each of the above sets. At that time, the Plaintiff prepared a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement that borrows KRW 50 million from the Defendant in order to guarantee D’s guarantee of deposit obligation.
No. 642, 2012, No. 825, Dec. 28, 2012, 2012, No. 327, May 6, 2013, No. 104, and No. 190, No. 2014, Feb. 28, 2014, the No. 2014, No. 190, No. 2014, and No. 190, a notary public prepared a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement, No. 2010, Oct. 29, 2012, and the content thereof is 50,000 won from the defendant at the time of receiving the limit of deposit, and the repayment period shall be 30% per year from the date of repayment, while the Plaintiff borrowed 50,000 won from the defendant, and damages for delay shall be 1 month and 30% per annum.
C. D received an amount of accounts by the sequences, but failed to pay eight times the amount of accounts from March 2014 to August 2014.
[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-5 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. In light of the fact that D’s separate notarial deeds have been prepared each time it receives a deposit in order to guarantee the payment of the deposit amount for the total five accounts of D, and each notarial deed is written as borrowing KRW 50,000,000,000, which is the same amount as the deposit money received by D, each notarial deed is written as a guarantee only for the deposit amount by the sequences of D.
The notarial deeds entered in the order (Evidence No. 642, No. 642, No. 2012, No. 825, 2012) guarantee the obligation for the deposit against D 1 and 3 times. Thus, the Plaintiff’s obligation under the notarial deeds entered in the order against the Defendant x KRW 2.5 million for the unpaid deposit against D 1 and 3 times.