logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.04.24 2019가단5213156
구상금 등 청구의 소
Text

1. Defendant B’s KRW 34,633,370 as well as 6% per annum from April 24, 2019 to May 23, 2019, respectively, to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 18, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a credit insurance agreement with Defendant B and Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) on the entire loan obligation, and issued a credit insurance policy to the Nonparty Company.

B. Accordingly, Defendant B borrowed KRW 34 million from the non-party company, but did not pay the loan around January 3, 2019. On April 23, 2019, the Plaintiff paid KRW 34,633,370 to the non-party company insurance money under the above credit insurance.

The interest rate for delay under the above credit insurance agreement is 6% per annum until the 30th day from the day following the payment of insurance proceeds and 9% per annum from the next day (if the interest rate for delay of the non-party company is lower, such interest rate

C. On the other hand, on July 28, 2017, Defendant B leased the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from the Defendant Korea Land and Housing Corporation (hereinafter “Defendant Corporation”) with the term of KRW 17,816,00, and the term of lease on August 31, 2019, and paid the lease deposit. On August 23, 2017, Defendant B entered into a modified contract with the former period and paid the increased lease deposit.

The Defendant B set up a pledge on the claim for refund of the lease deposit and notified the Defendant Corporation of this on August 22, 2017, with the limit of collateral amount at KRW 35,816,000 to the non-party company as security for the loan obligation against the non-party company.

On April 24, 2019, Nonparty Company transferred the said pledge to the Plaintiff, and notified the Defendant Corporation of the said pledge on April 26, 2019.

E. Defendant B did not deliver the instant real estate even after the termination of the term of the said lease agreement, and the Plaintiff claimed the delivery of the instant real estate to Defendant B by subrogationing the lessor’s Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] A.

arrow