logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원홍성지원보령시법원 2017.11.28 2017가단1021
청구이의
Text

1. The defendant's compulsory execution based on the original copy of the payment order issued by the court 2017 tea92 against the plaintiffs is denied.

2...

Reasons

1. On December 6, 2005, Plaintiff A received a loan of KRW 10,00,000 from the Defendant, and Plaintiff B jointly guaranteed this amount. The Plaintiffs failed to repay this amount, and the Defendant applied for a payment order against the Plaintiffs as prescribed by this Court No. 2017 tea92 on March 28, 2017, and received the payment order order and confirmed on April 4, 2005, there is no dispute between the parties.

2. Each of the plaintiffs and the defendant's arguments is a non-member of the defendant's safe, and the extinctive prescription has expired because the defendant's claim on the above payment order against the plaintiffs was a commercial bond under Article 64 of the Commercial Act, and the extinctive prescription has expired due to the application of the five-year extinctive prescription under Article 64 of the Commercial Act. Thus, the defendant asserted that the payment order on the order against the plaintiffs was erroneous and that compulsory execution based on the original copy of the above payment order was rejected. Since the defendant borrowed the above loan as a member's qualification from the defendant's safe, since the above claim on the loan was a civil bond and the ten-year extinctive prescription has not been expired

3. Determination. According to the whole purport of the statement and pleading of the evidence No. 2 (payment order) as well as the statement and the statement of the argument, Plaintiff A borrowed KRW 10,000,000,00 as a general loan agreement from Defendant Treasury on December 6, 2005, at the interest rate of 12% on December 6, 2005 and 17% on the date of repayment on December 6, 2005, with interest rate of 12% on the date of repayment on December 6, 2005, and Plaintiff B offered joint guarantee, and Plaintiff B failed to pay interest after April 22, 2007.

The loans extended by Defendant community credit cooperatives, as commercial claims, shall be extended not only to non-member cooperatives, but also to members of the cooperatives, etc. in cases where profit-making is recognized in light of the size, purpose, interest rate, place of use, etc. of loans, which constitute commercial activities, five years under Article 64 of the Commercial Act.

arrow