logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2018.01.17 2017가합22144
대여금
Text

1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 300,000,000 won and the period from May 22, 2009 to December 30, 2009.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, with the trade name D, engaged in credit business from December 21, 2004 to December 31, 2009.

B. On August 16, 2006, the Plaintiff agreed to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 48% per annum after the due date for repayment as of August 21, 2006 when it lent KRW 300,000,000 to Defendant B on August 16, 2006.

(hereinafter “instant loan”). C.

On August 21, 2006, the Plaintiff, a credit service provider, demanded Defendant B to prepare a notarial deed in order to secure the title of the instant loan claims. Accordingly, on August 21, 2006, Defendant B entered the notarial deed (the amount of the notarial deed leased in consideration of the principal and interest on arrears of the instant loan) with the Plaintiff as KRW 400,00,000, and the due date for payment was set up by a notary public as determined by August 28, 2006 of the notarial deed No. 1041, a money loan loan agreement No. 1041, 2006, and hereinafter “instant notarial deed”). E, Defendant C sent Defendant B to Defendant B as a joint and several surety for the instant loan obligations.

From August 22, 2006 to April 25, 2008, Defendant B repaid totaling KRW 247,500,000 to the Plaintiff several times, and from November 2008 to the time before and after the filing of the instant lawsuit, Defendant B repaid totaling KRW 142,041,727 to the Plaintiff (i.e., dividend amounting to KRW 42,041,727,00,000 in the auction procedure for the real estate owned by E), and the Plaintiff was paid the said amount.

E. On May 4, 2015, the Defendants and E filed an objection suit against the Plaintiff by the Ulsan District Court 2015Gahap1617, which is “The Plaintiff’s Defendants and E shall not be subject to compulsory execution based on the instant notarial deed against the Defendants and E., and the Ulsan District Court rendered a favorable judgment against the Defendants and E on January 28, 2016, and the Plaintiff accordingly.

arrow