(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.10.21 2016나1988

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.10.21 2016나1988

양수금

Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. B entered into an installment financing agreement with EL branch Capital Co., Ltd. on October 17, 2000 and borrowed 2.7 million won from the said company.

B. On June 27, 2001, B entered into a exchange loan agreement ( principal 2.410,000 won) with the above company on the loan.

(hereinafter “instant exchange loan agreement”). C.

The defendant and C are the children and spouse of B, and the application form for the above substitutional loan agreement entered that the defendant and C jointly and severally guaranteed the obligations under the substitutional loan agreement of this case between B and the defendant.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 3 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is jointly and severally and severally liable to pay to the plaintiff who is the final transferee of the above claim in accordance with the substitutional loan agreement between EL Capital Co., Ltd. and the above substitutional loan agreement (hereinafter "the exchange loan agreement of this case").

On this issue, the defendant asserts that the above debt of B is not a joint and several surety or a delegation thereof.

B. According to the evidence before the judgment, it is recognized that the letter of delegation (the purport of delegation by the defendant to C, the father of the defendant) in the name of the defendant and the certificate of personal seal impression of the defendant are attached to the agreement on the exchange theory (Evidence A No. 4) in this case.

According to this, it seems that C, the father of the defendant, entered into a joint and several guarantee agreement on behalf of the defendant, on behalf of the defendant.

However, there is a power of attorney attached to the evidence that C signed a joint and several guarantee contract with the defendant, but according to the above-mentioned evidence and the whole purport of pleading, it can be seen that the above-mentioned letter of attorney and the defendant's penology are different. The above-mentioned letter of attorney also C or C.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2016.07.15 2016나51089

-창원지방법원 2017.01.19 2015나37225

-대전지방법원 2016.10.21 2016나132

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.13 2017나10595

-대전지방법원 2016.11.04 2016나521